Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mageth · 07-08-2003, 11:18 AM

But God can see the whole thing, and and gave us insight into the system.

How do you know god can see the whole thing, and how do you know he gave us insight into the "system"? You don't know these things and, as you admit later in this post, you can't prove them; you can only assert them.

Just because you don't agree with the insight He gave us being valid, doesn't mean it isnt.

And just because you agree with the insight he supposedly gave us is valid doesn't mean it is. So what?

Oh really? So you know the universal, absolute requirements of divine justice like the back of your hand?

I know what the bible says about it. But then, men wrote the bible, not god, so those men (and those who believe what they wrote) are the ones that claim to know the requirements of divine justice, not god.

And you can create a system better than the perfect ruler of the universe? Please, enlighten us on your "better" method, and it has to follow the rules of God's nature ( i.e holiness, eternal justice, righteousness, absolute requirement to punish sin etc.).

You're leaving out "omnibenevolence, omniscience, and omnipresence." Surely such a god should be able to create a universe without "sin", suffering, death and eternal punishment. In fact, such a god should only create a universe without those things. Logical conclusion: either god doesn't exist or god is not the perfect god you think he is.

Hypothetically speaking if God does exist. Since we are discussing a system He created, obviously we are making the assumption that He does exist, or we wouldn't be questioning it.

As stated above, a god with all the omnimax attributes you attribute to it would not have created this universe. So it's only logical to conclude that such a god does not exist. If a god created this universe, then it's missing some of the "perfect" attributes you attribute to it.

How do you know they are far closer to reality?

Because they're based on actual evidence rather than on a 3000-year-old primitive myth with no basis in reality.

Do you have all knowledge of the universe? Do you know every intricate detail of how every universal law works, and has worked since the beginning of time, in every applicable setting imaginable?

No, but so what? I know plenty to know that the Genesis account of creation and the flood, for example, are clearly myths.

This is an illogical conclusion.

What exactly is an illogical conclusion? That theories based on actual evidence are closer to reality than a 3000-year-old myth? Hah.

Until you become omniscient, you can never make the claim that you are absolutely right.

I don't recall ever making that claim. And what's good for the goose is good for the gander - until you become omniscient, you can't claim you're absolutely right either.

My belief came through years of thought, study and tears. What makes your disbelief more valid than my belief? It can't be proven as fact, or disproven as fact either way - so why claim its a myth, when you really don't know?

No, Magus; I really do know it's a myth. Modern science, through careful consideration of the evidence, and the fact that mankind has been inventing such myths to explain the world around him even longer than the bible has been around, make that clear.

Your stance would lead to you having to give credence to all those other myths and religions, BTW. You'd have to grant equal validity to the Hindu myths, for example.

The more acceptable and logical conclusion would be that you don't believe its real, but its perfectly acceptable for others to believe its real if thats where life lead them.

Sure, you can believe it's real, whatever floats your boat. But the evidence clearly indicates otherwise. Now who's being illogical?

Hmm, I don't know - being a human that possesses probably one trillionth of the knowledge in the entire universe ( if not astronomically less), yet claiming to know better then God (again, assuming He exists) who has 100% of all knowledge of the universe past, present and future.

You miss the point; I don't claim to know better than God; I claim to know better than the God you define. Such a god would not create such a universe. If there is a god, I'm sure she's much smarter than me and would know this as well.

You claim God is less moral, less fair, unloving, sadistic etc. compared to you,

No, I did not claim that - it's your definition of god, your claims about what your god will, or even must, do, that we're discussing.

but you base that on an understanding with no depth.

An odd statement from someone who just used the argument that "its perfectly acceptable for others to believe its real if thats where life lead them."

You see God judge people in the Bible and conclude, what a jerk - i would have never done that!

You're damn right, and neither would the perfect, omnimax god you define.

Yet, you weren't there, you aren't perfect, you aren't omniscient, and you aren't the sovereign ruler of the universe

And note that neither are you...

- so your assertions that God is worse than you have no value or purpose since there is nothing in the universe by which God's standards can be compared to - because His will always be infinitely above ours.

So your assertions about God are equally unfounded. And there is something "God's standards" can be compared to - your perfect, omnimax definition of God, and your claims about what god will or must do. And the standards and actions of god you describe, and his actions described in your Holy Book, simply don't sync with that "perfect, divine" definition.

Mageth · 07-08-2003, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
God's nature is part of God. Describe some examples of human nature that applies to all humans for me.

Let me get this straight, then; what restricts god is god himself? And he has no power, though being omnimax, to overcome the restrictions he places on himself?

Yet he must punish me for my inability to overcome the restrictions he created me with, e.g. a skeptical nature and critical thinking ability that doesn't allow me to believe in a particular one of the many god-myths which, like all of them, is supported by no evidence? I can no more make myself believe in your god than he can overcome his nature.

Amaranth · 07-08-2003, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Sunset Friday to dawn on Sunday is only a day and a half...time off for good behavior.

Curses! Back to Sunday School for me, I guess...

On a somewhat related point - Notice how the "sacrifice" Jesus supposedly made was his life (despite that we all live forever) and his agony on the cross. What about the day and a half in hell? What...Hell hath no fury like a small-time Roman govenor scorned?

I'm glad some of yea enjoyed my little story. To be honest, when I wrote "Needs some work" at the end, it was because I thought the parody could have been done much better. Having re-read it, that line works on a few levels. Oh, the irony...

Amaranth

Biff the unclean · 07-08-2003, 02:13 PM

Curses! Back to Sunday School for me, I guess...
You were probably confused because the prophecy said "On the third day he shall rise again!!!!!" Since the Jewish day starts at sunset, that's sunset Friday to sunset Saturday being one day and sunset Saturday to�.hmmm wait a minute (let me think�on the third day he shall�thirty days hath November, April, June, and�)
Well, so much for that prophecy.

I ate Pascal's Wafer · 07-08-2003, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Says who? You? Apparently there is, or God would have found a different way.

Yes. If you can find a way for a finite entity to create a crime so horrenous that he deserves eternal torture, then feel free to post it. If you can't find a way, talk to your invisible friend (err, deity) and see if he knows a way.

-Nick

mike_decock · 07-08-2003, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean
Sunset Friday to dawn on Sunday is only a day and a half...time off for good behavior.

I just figured it out! A day and a half to us is like 3 days to a crucified deity.

-Mike...

I ate Pascal's Wafer · 07-08-2003, 02:35 PM

Quote:

You can't see the whole system in depth from beginning to end, you can only see whats on the outside.

And you can? The system your friend has set up is very curiously like that of a misanthropist. How do you know that God doesn't truly hate the world, which is why he infinitely punishes people for finite crimes? One little error in belief can land you in an eternity of hell. That doesn't sound just to me.

If it quacks like a duck...

Quote:

You assume, just because you don't like the system thats in place, that it isn't the best way.

Assume? Hell, I know there are better ways of doing it. Of course better is a relative term. If God is benevolent and kind, then there are better ways to dish out justice. If God is an evil unclefucker, then it's hard to get much better than the one currently in place.

Quote:

I love how atheists, seem to always know better than a perfect divine god, as though they are just the smartest people on earth.

We do know that there are more just and fair ways of sentencing people for their sins. Of course this may not be God's plan. If he really does hate his creation, then he knows that the system currently in place is as good as anything.

Quote:

The arrogance and pride on this board is definately well established.

I knew that when I first started talking to you.

Quote:

Please, enlighten us on your "better" method, and it has to follow the rules of God's nature ( i.e holiness, eternal justice, righteousness, absolute requirement to punish sin etc.).

Sure. Let the punishment fit the crime. If a person makes an honest mistake in belief, then let the person spend a set amount of time in a purgatory until the "sentence" is served and let him on into heaven. If the person commits a more serious crime, then more time is required, but once the time is served that fellow can come in as well. This is fair and just. Eternal punishment for finite crimes is not.

-Nick

Javaman · 07-08-2003, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mike_decock
I just figured it out! A day and a half to us is like 3 days to a crucified deity.

-Mike...

Some may remember this thread. It's worth a read.

worldling · 07-09-2003, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
I love how atheists, seem to always know better than a perfect divine god, as though they are just the smartest people on earth. .

They don't know better than a "perfect divine god". They just know better than you. This self-contradictory and absurd concept of a deity that you carry round in your head is just that - an idea, an opinion, a hypothesis that you subscribe to. It doesn't make sense, so atheists criticise it. And you hide behind the smokescreen of "how dare you criticise a perfect divine god".

What you really mean is "how dare you criticise me".

It's pathetic.

winstonjen · 07-10-2003, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by cydonia

What was this is response to?

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

07-08-2003, 11:18 AM	#51
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	But God can see the whole thing, and and gave us insight into the system. How do you know god can see the whole thing, and how do you know he gave us insight into the "system"? You don't know these things and, as you admit later in this post, you can't prove them; you can only assert them. Just because you don't agree with the insight He gave us being valid, doesn't mean it isnt. And just because you agree with the insight he supposedly gave us is valid doesn't mean it is. So what? Oh really? So you know the universal, absolute requirements of divine justice like the back of your hand? I know what the bible says about it. But then, men wrote the bible, not god, so those men (and those who believe what they wrote) are the ones that claim to know the requirements of divine justice, not god. And you can create a system better than the perfect ruler of the universe? Please, enlighten us on your "better" method, and it has to follow the rules of God's nature ( i.e holiness, eternal justice, righteousness, absolute requirement to punish sin etc.). You're leaving out "omnibenevolence, omniscience, and omnipresence." Surely such a god should be able to create a universe without "sin", suffering, death and eternal punishment. In fact, such a god should only create a universe without those things. Logical conclusion: either god doesn't exist or god is not the perfect god you think he is. Hypothetically speaking if God does exist. Since we are discussing a system He created, obviously we are making the assumption that He does exist, or we wouldn't be questioning it. As stated above, a god with all the omnimax attributes you attribute to it would not have created this universe. So it's only logical to conclude that such a god does not exist. If a god created this universe, then it's missing some of the "perfect" attributes you attribute to it. How do you know they are far closer to reality? Because they're based on actual evidence rather than on a 3000-year-old primitive myth with no basis in reality. Do you have all knowledge of the universe? Do you know every intricate detail of how every universal law works, and has worked since the beginning of time, in every applicable setting imaginable? No, but so what? I know plenty to know that the Genesis account of creation and the flood, for example, are clearly myths. This is an illogical conclusion. What exactly is an illogical conclusion? That theories based on actual evidence are closer to reality than a 3000-year-old myth? Hah. Until you become omniscient, you can never make the claim that you are absolutely right. I don't recall ever making that claim. And what's good for the goose is good for the gander - until you become omniscient, you can't claim you're absolutely right either. My belief came through years of thought, study and tears. What makes your disbelief more valid than my belief? It can't be proven as fact, or disproven as fact either way - so why claim its a myth, when you really don't know? No, Magus; I really do know it's a myth. Modern science, through careful consideration of the evidence, and the fact that mankind has been inventing such myths to explain the world around him even longer than the bible has been around, make that clear. Your stance would lead to you having to give credence to all those other myths and religions, BTW. You'd have to grant equal validity to the Hindu myths, for example. The more acceptable and logical conclusion would be that you don't believe its real, but its perfectly acceptable for others to believe its real if thats where life lead them. Sure, you can believe it's real, whatever floats your boat. But the evidence clearly indicates otherwise. Now who's being illogical? Hmm, I don't know - being a human that possesses probably one trillionth of the knowledge in the entire universe ( if not astronomically less), yet claiming to know better then God (again, assuming He exists) who has 100% of all knowledge of the universe past, present and future. You miss the point; I don't claim to know better than God; I claim to know better than the God you define. Such a god would not create such a universe. If there is a god, I'm sure she's much smarter than me and would know this as well. You claim God is less moral, less fair, unloving, sadistic etc. compared to you, No, I did not claim that - it's your definition of god, your claims about what your god will, or even must, do, that we're discussing. but you base that on an understanding with no depth. An odd statement from someone who just used the argument that "its perfectly acceptable for others to believe its real if thats where life lead them." You see God judge people in the Bible and conclude, what a jerk - i would have never done that! You're damn right, and neither would the perfect, omnimax god you define. Yet, you weren't there, you aren't perfect, you aren't omniscient, and you aren't the sovereign ruler of the universe And note that neither are you... - so your assertions that God is worse than you have no value or purpose since there is nothing in the universe by which God's standards can be compared to - because His will always be infinitely above ours. So your assertions about God are equally unfounded. And there is something "God's standards" can be compared to - your perfect, omnimax definition of God, and your claims about what god will or must do. And the standards and actions of god you describe, and his actions described in your Holy Book, simply don't sync with that "perfect, divine" definition.

07-08-2003, 02:13 PM	#54
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	Curses! Back to Sunday School for me, I guess... You were probably confused because the prophecy said "On the third day he shall rise again!!!!!" Since the Jewish day starts at sunset, that's sunset Friday to sunset Saturday being one day and sunset Saturday to�.hmmm wait a minute (let me think�on the third day he shall�thirty days hath November, April, June, and�) Well, so much for that prophecy.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.