GunnerJ

I've asked this before, and I'll ask it again: why do theists get to compare god to fallible, limited human beings when it's convienient for them, but we can't?

I would be disgusted that the justice system is that perverted and corrupt. Then again, the Xian Heaven is a courtroom where if you hire the judge's son as your lawyer, you get off scott free. Based on this celestial nepotism, I'm not surprised that such analogies are constructed.

Of course, if this person who took your place was the guy who sentenced you to death, and could easily ban the death penealty and let you off with a slap on the wrist without anyone giving him any guff, this changes the situation quite a bit...

Dave, perhaps you should ponder the fact that many of us here dispute that there is a metaphorical "death row" upon which we sit, and that Jesus even existed to be the metaphorical dupe who took our place on it. You would then have to explain why this person really didn't "die" at all on the electric chair (or whatever), but simply took a break from existence for the weekend. Unless you can establish these things:

• There is a "death row" upon which mankind sits
• There existed an historical Jesus
• He actually did "take our place" on this "death row."
• He actually died, not just zipped out of town for a few days

Until then your whole analogy is suspect.

The fact? <sigh> It's hopeless.

If I knew that I'd be back in action in three days, sure.

Dave, you can't have it both ways. Either Jesus died and stayed dead, getting the exact same same treatment we do, in a real sacrifice, or he "beat death," an ultimately hallow gesture for an omnipotent being, and didn't sacrifice anything. Please stop trying to have your cake and eat it too.

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by davidH:
<strong>Yeah, but what else would prove that God loved you?</strong>

He could leave me alone, rather than dangling me over hell and saying, "Love me, or else!"

<strong>Imagine if you were on death row and someone who didn't deserve to die came along and took your place and you were allowed to go free. What would you feel like?</strong>

Scum, for allowing an innocent person to die in my place.

<strong>More over would you not ask why that person did it? </strong>

I'd call the local asylum up and ask them if any recent escapees had a serious martyr complex.

<strong>Had you been on death row and he had showed up and gave you a gift and wished you all the best.... </strong>

Justice would have been served, and I would be less likely to assume that "he" was certifiably insane.

<strong>No, but the fact that he died shows how serious he was about us.</strong>

And the fact that he's going to make us burn for all eternity if we don't grovel before him shows how insecure and pathetic he is.

<strong>Would you give your life in exchange for someone else's unless u had a good reason for doing so? I doubt it.</strong>

I don't see what's wrong with waiting for a good reason before you give up the only life you're likely to have.

<strong>But in order that he be shown to be God he rose from the dead. Death can't overcome him but when he rose he defeated death. </strong>

Thereby negating the whole concept of "sacrifice" since he lost nothing. Instead he apparently gained a better position than before, not to mention the right to capitalize on his so-called sacrifice for the rest of time.

<strong>And we as Christians put our trust in the one who overcame death.</strong>

So did the ancient Egyptians.

[ January 14, 2002: Message edited by: QueenofSwords ]</p>

Euromutt

I'm going to try to remember it all; if I recall correctly, the story goes like this:

the Jews, until then the chosen people, complain that God has gotten out of touch with humanity (read "Jews", since where everyone else was concerned the Big Guy kept his touch and wicked aim with the occasional mass smiting);
God, supposedly being a nice guy (apart from the periodical genocides, but who's counting?) decides that the only way to gain understanding of humanity's plight is to detach part of himself as his son and have said son experience mortal life;
Joshua/Jesus is a lad with some really propnounced ideas about how the world should be, and gets nailed to a tree (a sentence which I've been led to understand was only assigned to violent criminals, but my sources may be dodgy) - the Big Guy saw this coming all along of course, or the whole point of the exercise would have been lost;
Joshua/Jesus dies, but is resurrected and taken up - God has not so much sacrificed his son, as had part of himself go through the human process, and is therefore better able to understand the human plight (Except, of course, that he doesn't do anything to improve said plight for the next 2000-odd years).

Sounds good (apart from the two millennia of divine uselessness). But then that whole "original sin" thing comes into it (which was based on an entrapment scenario to begin with); I'm still not clear on the lifting, or lack thereof, of the original sin. I hear phrases like "Jesus died for our sins" - excellent! that means it's lifted, right? So how come menstruations still sich a pain in the bollocks, I mean abdomen?
No, wait, you have to open yourself to Jesus and trust in him, and then after you die things will get better. But then, what was the point of the mortal experience thing in the first place?

KweschunThEAnserz

quoted by QueenofSwords:
That gave me a LOL this morning.
Anyways, to my dissapointment I was only able to find one of the three verses just this morning and I'll keep looking for the other ones.

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made so that men are without excuse.

I usually approach thses kind of questions with what I know about God. Numerous times it says God is just and fair (I know I know, none of you think so because how could a fair god kill all those people?!? For this argument give me lots of slack and assume this true as it applies to people who have never heard of God or "reject" him because of their upbringing) God does not condemn the innocent, he judges only those who have rejected him flat out. A just God is not going to let this happen. I'll look for the other verses. Times like this I wish I actually remembered scripture. echk!

I'm gathering by the answers that the only sacrifice that God could have made that would please anyone here is that he died completely. I mean the omnimax (thanks mageth) God ceasing to exist. Well, I wouldn't want to be in a place where God was not present (which is one of the definitions of hell) Then we would really be in trouble. Then there would be NO hope. I wouldn't find much reason to live other than to survive. I would have to create my own right and wrong, rely on only myself and others who fail me. Live life knowing I'm just a small meaningless portion of the huge universe until I just cease to exist.
Well anyways, I'm just ranting now. So, I don't think that the sacrifice of God actually dying would be worth it for us. Not that it would make any difference for people who don't believe in God to begin with, but oh well I guess this string is done.

Mageth

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made so that men are without excuse.

And science has for the last several hundred years been continually finding naturalistic explanations for "what has been made," reducing this god to a "god of the gaps" (and the gaps are getting smaller and fewer).

I usually approach thses kind of questions with what I know about God. Numerous times it says God is just and fair (I know I know, none of you think so because how could a fair god kill all those people?!? For this argument give me lots of slack and assume this true as it applies to people who have never heard of God or "reject" him because of their upbringing) God does not condemn the innocent, he judges only those who have rejected him flat out.

I see no evidence of a god for me to reject (in particular the xian god). I don't reject god; I just know that he doesn't exist. There's a difference. So I guess I'm off the hook, eh?

A just God is not going to let this happen. I'll look for the other verses. Times like this I wish I actually remembered scripture. echk!

I'm gathering by the answers that the only sacrifice that God could have made that would please anyone here is that he died completely. I mean the omnimax (thanks mageth) God ceasing to exist. Well, I wouldn't want to be in a place where God was not present (which is one of the definitions of hell). Then we would really be in trouble. Then there would be NO hope. I wouldn't find much reason to live other than to survive. I would have to create my own right and wrong, rely on only myself and others who fail me. Live life knowing I'm just a small meaningless portion of the huge universe until I just cease to exist.

I (and you) live in a universe where god doesn't exist. I do perfectly well without him, thank you. The world's not that bad of a place to live in, is it, that you would feel totally worthless without a god-idea to make you feel important?

Well anyways, I'm just ranting now. So, I don't think that the sacrifice of God actually dying would be worth it for us. Not that it would make any difference for people who don't believe in God to begin with, but oh well I guess this string is done.

What I've said in this thread is that an omnimax god shouldn't have to sacrifice anything for anything. If he existed, then it would have been more logical and just (and, by definition, within his powers, and perhaps even required by his omnimax characteristics) for him to create the universe so that we wouldn't need redemption (or wave a magic wand and fix things without having to off himself or his son).

[ edited to delete extraneous ubb code ]

[ January 15, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by KweschunThEAnserz:
<strong>Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made so that men are without excuse.</strong>

Firstly, eternal power and divine nature have been ascribed to many different gods. Therefore, how can, for example, a Muslim be sure that what he or she senses is due not to Allah but to the christian god?

If men are "without excuse" does this mean that the person in my story goes to hell for not making his mind up a minute sooner?

<strong>I usually approach thses kind of questions with what I know about God. Numerous times it says God is just and fair (I know I know, none of you think so because how could a fair god kill all those people?!? For this argument give me lots of slack and assume this true as it applies to people who have never heard of God or "reject" him because of their upbringing) God does not condemn the innocent, he judges only those who have rejected him flat out.</strong>

Let's assume that you came from a poorer part of the world that didn't have access to a bible and wasn't literate anyway. Therefore, what you heard about the christian god from a passing missionary sounded strange and scary (eg. a god dying, and people burning in hell). The traditions and beliefs of your own people sounded more familiar and believable. So it isn't so much a question of your rejecting a god as not immediately swallowing a funny and implausible story that someone told you. (I'm sure that, for example, you do not reply to telemarketers, "Oh yes, here's my credit card number, please take as much money as you like.")

So, in the example above, would that person go to hell?

<strong>A just God is not going to let this happen.</strong>

Now all we need to do is arrive at a mutually satisfying definition of justice.

<strong>I'm gathering by the answers that the only sacrifice that God could have made that would please anyone here is that he died completely.</strong>

I would rephrase this as "the only sacrifice god could have made is that he died completely." Because if he got his life back, he didn't sacrifice diddly squat.

<strong>Well, I wouldn't want to be in a place where God was not present (which is one of the definitions of hell) Then we would really be in trouble. Then there would be NO hope. I wouldn't find much reason to live other than to survive. I would have to create my own right and wrong, rely on only myself and others who fail me.</strong>

Isn't it horrible to think that without a god, we would have to use our own brains and judgement, not to mention finding reasons to live that involved this life and not the hypothetical next one?

Yet atheists and agnostics have done it and continue to do it.

<strong>Live life knowing I'm just a small meaningless portion of the huge universe until I just cease to exist. </strong>

If you believe you are meaningless, then I'm sure you will be.

If, on the other hand, you believe that your life does have meaning and that there are things you can do to improve the world, then the self-fulfilling prophecy applies again.

I am glad I fit into the latter category, and not the former.

KweschunThEAnserz

Heh, ok now we're definitely off topic but oh well I'm enjoying this

QueenofSwords wrote:
I've wanted to ask this of an atheist for some time (mabye I should post it on a saparate thread). Where is this meaning that the average atheists have? Also, what would be the reason to improve the world? What reasons do you have for being something more than an accident of nature, a life come from nothing to become nothing again?
Do you find comfort solely in other people? I mean if you believe in only naturalistic things and love which is just a chemical reaction for our survival, what really means anything valuable?
Or do we create our own meaning (as you think I have)? Do you believe everyone has just created their own meaning and this forum is just a conflict of these? Seriously help me out I want to understand (if I can)

Hope I'm not causing <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Koyaanisqatsi

The same "where" that you have, from ourselves. We just don't pretend it came from a fairy tale.

Rather than go down this pointless route yet again (there are countless threads on humanist morality here), let's turn this around and ask you what would be your reason for improving the world?

According to christianity, nothing you do will earn you favor; everything you do will earn you favor; only belief in Jesus will gain you salvation.

The end result of all of this contradictory nonsense is that christians do very little to improve the world compared to what they have historically done to divide and/or conquer the world.

Further, there was absolutely nothing new in what Jesus was teaching. Nothing. Everything that was taught (beside the pointless snake-oil aggrandizement, of course) was humanist in nature; essentially, do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Unfortunately for the world, christians, who are taught that they are worthless from birth and irredeemable sinners who must believe in a fairy tale in order to be saved, take that golden rule to heart and (historically) do unto others as they would have them do unto them; i.e., invade their territory and indoctrinate them unto their beliefs.

It is only a blink of an eye, historically speaking, that the power of the cult has been usurped and that only in America and that only to a very small degree. Take a vacation to Rome some time and then we'll talk.

I would be very careful about asking rhetorical questions regarding the comparative benefits of living in reality as opposed to living in a control cult fantasy.

I need a reason?

Isn't that preferable and more supportive to "bettering" our lives than to find other people damned sinners and finding comfort in self-delusion?

The same thing that "means anything valuable" to you; our subjective experiences and value judgments as humans.

The qualitative difference is that we take full responsibility for everything that happens in our lives, both "good" and "bad" and don't walk around pretending that it's part of a mythological warrior-deity fantasy system.

Bingo! See? You have now demonstrated what cults like christianity steal from in order to indoctrinate. You know you create your own meaning; your own value judgments and so does your cult.

That's what they use to get you to follow their perversions of those basic human traits. Your post is a perfect example; you actually believe that your "meaning" is not subjective, when the entire bible is nothing more than a selective, subjective screed.

If you don't believe me, then tell me who are god's chosen people and why aren't you one of them? That would be the original god--the O.G.--by the way, not the subjectively revised version.

Do you believe a being you can't know and can't define and who behaves in the manner the bible depicts can create meaning?

If so, how? At least we can tell you from whence "meaning" comes; all you can do is define and declare ("you" in the generalized sense, of course).

After all, which objective arbiter of "meaning" are we talking about here? Allah? Yahweh? Jesus? Buddha? The Great And Powerful Too RAH Loo?

Then, seriously, consider the fact that your implied "meaning" comes from a mystical fairy god king concocted by oppressed people thousands of years ago in the Middle East.

Look what that's wrought throughout the centuries.

Not yet, but, it's early and you're new .

If you can explain how the "ineffable" can possibly be a source of "meaning" and then pin that ineffable source down to any one definable quality that is innate instead of imagined, then perhaps you'd have an argument.

Until then, we all share the same sense of meaning; that which we personally apply and agree upon. You know, just like your cult elders when they formed the canon you call the New Testament?

Now, to get back to the original post (the "OP" in our short hand) and your responses to that, can you explain to me how a god sacrificing himself to himself has any relevant "meaning?"

[ January 15, 2002: Message edited by: Koyaanisqatsi ]</p>

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by KweschunThEAnserz:
<strong>Where is this meaning that the average atheists have?</strong>

I would ask : where isn't the meaning? It's in myself, my friends and family, my future, career, hobbies, the world around me, everything.

I think meaning is like beauty : it's in the eye of the beholder.

<strong>Also, what would be the reason to improve the world?</strong>

Uh, for the same reason I clean up my apartment? Because I don't like living in a mess. Besides, a mess is inefficient.

Even after I'm gone, the world will still be there. Therefore, I want to leave it a slightly better place than when I entered it.

<strong>What reasons do you have for being something more than an accident of nature, a life come from nothing to become nothing again?</strong>

My conception was largely a chance (or accident, if you prefer) of nature, because I'm pretty sure my dad produced lots of sperm and my mom made lots of eggs. Therefore, the chances of getting this particular combination were low, but they hit the jackpot. Well done, mom and dad! Thank you. Ehh, you didn't need to try again, though, since I really got used to being an only child.

But seriously, my life will eventually end and my body will decay into its component molecules and that will be the end of me. What I have left behind will be the lives that I have touched and altered, the books and songs I have written, the memories of the life I have lived. In conception, I may be an accident, because there's no way my parents could have planned the exact sequence of DNA that makes the genetic me. But by the life I have chosen to live, I am not an accident, and if I can leave a great or gentle enough mark on the world, I never will be. Will my life become nothing? Yes, but I find that better than the prospect of grovelling before a god for all eternity.

<strong>Do you find comfort solely in other people?</strong>

Heck no. I have several friends and a wonderful family, but I don't depend only on them for "comfort", however you define that.

<strong>I mean if you believe in only naturalistic things and love which is just a chemical reaction for our survival, what really means anything valuable?</strong>

Anything valuable? You mean, tangible things that I find valuable? Books, nature, cats, science, music, games, souvenirs, my autographed picture of Marc Alaimo... I could go on and on. And so many abstract things in life are valuable, including of course my freedom to believe what I wish. What exactly are you getting at with this question?

<strong>Or do we create our own meaning (as you think I have)?</strong>

No, I don't think you've created your own meaning. I think you have turned to an ancient Hebrew tribal myth (and the subsequent religion that grew out of it) for meaning.

And for someone with your username, you haven't done a lot of answering the questions I asked in my last post.

[ January 15, 2002: Message edited by: QueenofSwords ]</p>

Monkeybot

All I've gotta say is, this cruci-fiction stuff makes it sound like God needs group therapy.