Philosoft

That he needs this bizarre, convoluted system to accomplish some end is testament to, what? His divine insanity?

Fiach

[QUOTE]Originally posted by doodad
God is not in our face as much as you may have been led to believe, and I think the antics of Pres. Bush may have contributed to your opinion. Hopefull he's a one term president, and I voted for the idiot for lack of a better alternative.

Bush may have contributed. But in contrast to Scotland where I hardly ever heard of God in conversations or on Telly, in America, I see God signs along the highway. Glowing neon signs of "Jesus is the Answer" and "Jesus saves". I hear something about religion in every news programme. I tune the radio from left to right and there are at least 4 or 5 radio evangelists. In America, God, through no fault of is own, is in our faces.

I think the genocide and the killing of dissenters and innocents in the OT portrays not the work of a God, but extreme zealotry or nationalism on the part of the ancient Jews. Like so many self-centered groups, they sugar coat their behavior with divine principles in order to justify their acts. I've been studying the OT recently, and those jerks cannot even get along amongst themselves, let alone get along with others.

So you saw what I saw in the Old testament. So many Christians have justified it as "they deserved it," "they were blasphemers," "God knew the babies would be idolators when they grew up." I appreciate your rational approach. But when I noted that as a child, it discredited the Bible as an inspired word of God. How do you accept the Bible as inspired if it contains propaganda justifying gross immortality?

Sad to say, our administration seems to be infected with the same attitude. "If you aren't with us you are against us." I hope there's enough people left in America to see him for what he is and will turn him out the next time around. If you've ever lived around a radical southern believer you would see where Busky is coming from. He's on an ego trip and it will hopefull end someday. I do think that some of what he wants to do is in the interest of freedom and peace in the long run but I wish he'd leave religion out of it.

He is a real fundamentalist. As advised by Ralph Reed, then of the Christian Coalition, he downplayed somewhat his more extreme fundamentalist beliefs. He did as Reed advised, run as a stealth candidate. Reed cautioned to tone down the evangelical rhetoric, avoid the question as much as possible until you win. Reed said "They (liberals and humanists) will not know what hit them until they see the body bags." (The quote may not be exact but the content is correct, and the body bag metaphor was used.)

I have no problem with evangelicals believing what they do. I have no problem with Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Wiccans, or Buddhists, etc. I just think that the 8% of Americans who are atheists and largely upper income, hight tax paying, educated people should not remain second class citizens. The government which their taxes support should not support religion. Religion is already the wealthiest sector of the American public or second wealthiest. They don't need Government subsidy.

Fiach

Wyz_sub10

No, people believe murder is wrong because, at the base level, it does not promote a sustainable society.

And at the conscious level, because they understand the nature of loss and importance of survival. It's called 'empathy'.

Animals in organized societies do not kill each other at random. Can you think of a reason for this, or is this the image of god at work too?

I'll bet you can come up with a better reason.

Wyz_sub10

All you are saying is that the concept of morality is malleable based on what god is said to have done. In other words, morality has no meaning whatsoever.

If I told you that god told me to go out and have as much promiscuous sex as I could endure, what would you say?

Do you think that it was possible god told me that?

Hawkingfan

If God had a "redemptive" purpose before creation, then the people who died in the Flood were murdered for no reason at all. They died in vain. If Jesus was with God in the beginning and God planned for Jesus to die for the sins of the world right from the start as the book of John and many Christians suggest, then there would have been no reason to kill the entire world (except for Noah), because God would want them redeemed through Jesus at a later time as you say above. But as you can see, it doesn't make sense. God is an asshole.

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Philosoft,
System?


SOMMS

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Hawkingfan,
Well, at least your theist...that's a start.



Need to work on your attitude next.



Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Wyz_sub10,
Uh...?

No. I'm saying something that is Holy (God) can harbor no evil intent and that genocide requires evil intent.


This sounds just like Silent Dave's 'What if God said...' question.
It's the same as asking me what I would say if I met a married bachelor. It wouldn't happen.


No.


Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Philosoft

For lack of a better word. Jesus obviously didn't need to die for anyone's sins because an omnipotent being can forgive sins whenever he wants. It seems to have been another of a series of belief tests: "Will these beings accept a human as God? Will their love for me increase as a result of divine sacrifice?" Better yet, "Will beings generations after the fact accept stories that portray Jesus as God?" I can't think of a good reason for God to go through all the trouble unless he's looking for a specific reaction.

Philosoft

You have to base this on a particular definition of 'God.' The problem is, not everyone agrees that your definition is the correct one. "A bachelor is an unmarried man" is a completely uncontroversial statement, basically just a shortcut - if we didn't have the word "bachelor," we could almost as easily say, "unmarried man." "God would never say/do X" is none of these things.