(09-06-2022, 04:54 PM)grampahol Wrote: God is a money laundering operation..period.
To my knowledge there has never been a money laundering scandal involving the Tooth Fairy ..
what an strange thing to say. you are taking what men do an putting it on God. thats like saying if your children steals it automatic means YOU are running a thieving operation. that dont make much sense does it.
(08-30-2022, 08:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: And I agree with this take with an addition:
That is why I don't think we go to hell based on what we believe, or which god we believe in. We are to enjoy our lives and be good to others and treat all of nature with respect. That's it. We're here to take care of each other and our shared home. Do that and you've led a "good" life.
so you think you dont really have any consiquences? what exactly do you think you can go to hell for? you think you can lead a "good life" without believing in God and following his teachings?
that sounds like your leading a life according to your own standard and saying the heck with what God says.
(08-31-2022, 10:04 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Sorry, very late reply but thanks for the response.
Same here my friend. I don't get to interact on the site as much as I would like due to my schedule, so I'm often late with my replies.
Quote:Your argument seems to be that God is evil because we suffer. So is God only evil because more serious suffering like rape happens, or is he evil because suffering exists at all? If it's only specific suffering that makes God evil then what is it that makes other suffering such as chronic pain as you noted in your reply not evil when attributing all suffering to God?
As I stated, evil is the label we give to certain actions that can lead to suffering, but suffering -- in and of itself -- isn't automatically evil. For something to be deemed evil, it action or state of affairs must be intentional -- hence the examples provided.
Quote:I disagree here. I wouldnt say knowledge proves intent. God may very well know our actions but that doesn't mean he actually wanted those actions to take place. Rather, he is watching what he knew would happen play out.
God knowing the ending does not change the fact that every individual still had to make the choices that got to that ending, regardless of what God knew about it.
God wanting the story to play out and God wanting us to suffer are two different things.
Respectfully, when you state --
"God may very well know our actions but that doesn't mean he actually wanted those actions to take place. Rather, he is watching what he knew would happen play out."
-- think about what you're saying. Essentially, you're claiming the intentional can't be proven to be intentional --
God created humans.
God knew they would commit egregious acts of evil against each other.
God still chose to create humans in spite of that fact.
God watches as humans do what exactly what he knew they would.
God is not responsible for the evil he knew would result from his creation.
That conclusion is illogical, as it doesn't follow from the premises. He would necessarily bare responsibility because his actions were both premeditated and possessing complete foreknowledge. He chose to proceed knowing exactly what would occur. There is no point in that process where he can be absolved of that responsibility.
You also stated, "God wanting the story to play out and God wanting us to suffer are two different things." We are speaking of an omniscient being here; one who knows all, beginning to end. He knew that children would be molested, that women would be raped, that innocent people would be murdered, that armies would slaughter each other, that religions would commit atrocities in his name. He chose to proceed despite having that knowledge. It's difficult to say he didn't want those actions to take place when he purposely created this way instead of another way.
Quote:No, I wouldn't say we were responsible for those actions if those actions are made by their own free will. Regardless of whether we knew it would happen, it doesn't erase the fact that an individualistic choice had to be made for that event to take place and the initiator of that action bears the consequences of it, not the creator. The creation of the entity isn't the reason the suffering event takes place. It's the taking of the action itself. Without that there is simply just a created being that hasn't done anything yet. We would be responsible for bringing that being into the world, but we wouldn't bear responsibility for what that creation does. They chose to do whatever they did, so that's on them.
So, if you and I invented a car that we knew would cause countless deaths, and we put it on the market despite that knowledge, we would not be responsible? Surely you see the flaws in that logic. To say those who purchased the vehicles of their own free will does nothing to alleviate our initial and primary responsibility; for which we could not escape liability.
Quote:As for the inaction issue.
Let's say I see someone with a gun walking towards a school. This person sees me and says "you better get out of here I'm about to shoot this school up" and instead of stopping the guy I allow his free will to play out.
But, I also have the ability to remove any pain/suffering from the lives of those who experience the event.
What about that makes me evil?
The hypothetical is too generic. It would depend on the specifics of the situation.
For example:
If you have a phone but chose to simply walk away and do nothing -- ignoring the dire reality that is likely about to happen -- then I would certainly deem that inaction / indifference to be evil in nature because you knew lives might be lost, but intentionally did absolutely nothing (even something requiring minimal effort) to impede the course of events.
However, if instead of simply waking away, you did so while calling 911 and alerting them of the situation, you've at least made an effort to potentially prevent or minimize the loss of life, while still exercising your own right to self-preservation.
One approach is vastly and distinctly different than the other.
Quote:Great question. Why allow suffering if it can just be erased?
Well, to start, this is why I am making the point about intent. To even ask the question is to debate the intent. You seem to have already concluded the intent was just for us to suffer and therefore,, in your words, that makes God evil.
My conclusion differs from yours. I believe God allows suffering as a consequence for sin. I dont believe suffering is God's way of just having fun with us and then erasing it all. The erasing part, which I would consider God's salvation, is what comes after we've made the choice to turn from sin and accept Jesus as our savior.
In other words -- God created the mice, the rigged maze and the cheese?
God doesn't simply allow suffering; it could not exist without him. He is the author and guarantor of suffering, of evil, of misery. He could have created a world where those things didn't exist. He desired this version instead. It's the equivalent of someone holding a gun to your head and telling you to swear your allegiance to him or die. Yes, you have a choice, but the person forcing the choice is an insidious monster who is only interested in servitude by way of fear. The choice is not so much an exercise of true "free will" -- but rather an objective driven, purposefully tilted dichotomy.
I apologize if my assessments sound harsh, but as I provided in the earlier syllogism, the entire concept is completely nonsensical and defies logical, cognitive reasoning, in my personal opinion.
Quote:Lastly, to the hypnotist example. Again, we need to talk about intent here. When you say the hypnotist is "abusing" his wife, there's context that needs to be given to explain what you mean by that.
With God you have to account for free will, sin. and salvation to make the "abuse" have meaning. It's not just about erasing the suffering, it's about the sum of the parts.
If (X) will simply be erased after the fact; what purpose did (X) serve in the first place?
How exactly do the notions free will, sin and salvation give something like child rape "meaning"? How does that act contribute in any necessary way to the sum of the parts? If you or I saw a child being raped, our instinctive moral nature would cause us to stop it by any means necessary. In no scenario would we ever watch it with arms crossed saying, "It's OK, they won't remember it later."
What an utterly stomach turning concept. It always breaks my heart to see what are otherwise good people, use the most disturbing rationale to justify such things. They would never apply such logic when confronted with similar events in their own lives; only when reasoning about hypotheticals from a religious mindset.
(11-12-2022, 05:05 PM)Leon Wrote: so you think you dont really have any consiquences? what exactly do you think you can go to hell for? you think you can lead a "good life" without believing in God and following his teachings?
that sounds like your leading a life according to your own standard and saying the heck with what God says.
I guarantee you can lead a good life without believing in god and following his teachings.
Millions of people did so before the Christian god.
Millions of people do so now. Some believe in other gods, some believe in none.
Just as I can guarantee that millions lead bad lives all while claiming to following god and his teachings.
What *I* am doing is trying to be good to my fellow humans and lead the best life I can without fearing that the only reason to do so is a threat of eternal damnation from an entity that loves me unconditionally...but with a few conditions.
Quote:“Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!
But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money!”
― George Carlin
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(11-12-2022, 05:05 PM)Leon Wrote: so you think you dont really have any consiquences? what exactly do you think you can go to hell for? you think you can lead a "good life" without believing in God and following his teachings?
that sounds like your leading a life according to your own standard and saying the heck with what God says.
Are you saying you are not a good dude and you are only acting good because of the fear of God ?
And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
(12-19-2022, 04:43 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The Beatles version was better. I think they called it Yellow Submarine?
All jokes aside, this song actually sounds more like that "I've Had the Time Of My Life" from Dirty Dancing, I think. I also wonder how that Jesus-lovin' cowboy's life was "a disaster" before he found J-E-S-U-S-U-S. It would have been interesting seeing him shooting up behind the saloon, or something.
(09-06-2022, 04:54 PM)grampahol Wrote: God is a money laundering operation..period.
To my knowledge there has never been a money laundering scandal involving the Tooth Fairy ..
(12-18-2022, 04:12 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Same here my friend. I don't get to interact on the site as much as I would like due to my schedule, so I'm often late with my replies.
As I stated, evil is the label we give to certain actions that can lead to suffering, but suffering -- in and of itself -- isn't automatically evil. For something to be deemed evil, it action or state of affairs must be intentional -- hence the examples provided.
Respectfully, when you state --
"God may very well know our actions but that doesn't mean he actually wanted those actions to take place. Rather, he is watching what he knew would happen play out."
-- think about what you're saying. Essentially, you're claiming the intentional can't be proven to be intentional --
God created humans.
God knew they would commit egregious acts of evil against each other.
God still chose to create humans in spite of that fact.
God watches as humans do what exactly what he knew they would.
God is not responsible for the evil he knew would result from his creation.
That conclusion is illogical, as it doesn't follow from the premises. He would necessarily bare responsibility because his actions were both premeditated and possessing complete foreknowledge. He chose to proceed knowing exactly what would occur. There is no point in that process where he can be absolved of that responsibility.
You also stated, "God wanting the story to play out and God wanting us to suffer are two different things." We are speaking of an omniscient being here; one who knows all, beginning to end. He knew that children would be molested, that women would be raped, that innocent people would be murdered, that armies would slaughter each other, that religions would commit atrocities in his name. He chose to proceed despite having that knowledge. It's difficult to say he didn't want those actions to take place when he purposely created this way instead of another way.
So, if you and I invented a car that we knew would cause countless deaths, and we put it on the market despite that knowledge, we would not be responsible? Surely you see the flaws in that logic. To say those who purchased the vehicles of their own free will does nothing to alleviate our initial and primary responsibility; for which we could not escape liability.
The hypothetical is too generic. It would depend on the specifics of the situation.
For example:
If you have a phone but chose to simply walk away and do nothing -- ignoring the dire reality that is likely about to happen -- then I would certainly deem that inaction / indifference to be evil in nature because you knew lives might be lost, but intentionally did absolutely nothing (even something requiring minimal effort) to impede the course of events.
However, if instead of simply waking away, you did so while calling 911 and alerting them of the situation, you've at least made an effort to potentially prevent or minimize the loss of life, while still exercising your own right to self-preservation.
One approach is vastly and distinctly different than the other.
In other words -- God created the mice, the rigged maze and the cheese?
God doesn't simply allow suffering; it could not exist without him. He is the author and guarantor of suffering, of evil, of misery. He could have created a world where those things didn't exist. He desired this version instead. It's the equivalent of someone holding a gun to your head and telling you to swear your allegiance to him or die. Yes, you have a choice, but the person forcing the choice is an insidious monster who is only interested in servitude by way of fear. The choice is not so much an exercise of true "free will" -- but rather an objective driven, purposefully tilted dichotomy.
I apologize if my assessments sound harsh, but as I provided in the earlier syllogism, the entire concept is completely nonsensical and defies logical, cognitive reasoning, in my personal opinion.
If (X) will simply be erased after the fact; what purpose did (X) serve in the first place?
How exactly do the notions free will, sin and salvation give something like child rape "meaning"? How does that act contribute in any necessary way to the sum of the parts? If you or I saw a child being raped, our instinctive moral nature would cause us to stop it by any means necessary. In no scenario would we ever watch it with arms crossed saying, "It's OK, they won't remember it later."
What an utterly stomach turning concept. It always breaks my heart to see what are otherwise good people, use the most disturbing rationale to justify such things. They would never apply such logic when confronted with similar events in their own lives; only when reasoning about hypotheticals from a religious mindset.
(12-18-2022, 06:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: I guarantee you can lead a good life without believing in god and following his teachings.
Millions of people did so before the Christian god.
Millions of people do so now. Some believe in other gods, some believe in none.
Just as I can guarantee that millions lead bad lives all while claiming to following god and his teachings.
What *I* am doing is trying to be good to my fellow humans and lead the best life I can without fearing that the only reason to do so is a threat of eternal damnation from an entity that loves me unconditionally...but with a few conditions.
so much bad information and false accusatons in these comments. so many folks hate God and the idea if devoting everything from him they have to say the most false stuff you can imagine even insulting God which is awful and sad. i pray for you folks an hope you find the right way of thinking before its too late.
(12-20-2022, 11:39 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: The power of khrist commands you!
mocking the Lord your God is a dangerous game to play sir. please reconsider doing that because im worried for you if you dont. i hate the thoughts of any body going to hell an i dont want to see you end up there. God be with you an hopeful change your heart
(12-23-2022, 11:46 PM)Leon Wrote: mocking the Lord your God is a dangerous game to play sir. please reconsider doing that because im worried for you if you dont. i hate the thoughts of any body going to hell an i dont want to see you end up there. God be with you an hopeful change your heart
As is your belief.
Quote:Eskimo: 'If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?'
Priest: 'No, not if you did not know.'
Eskimo: 'Then why did you tell me?'
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(12-23-2022, 11:46 PM)Leon Wrote: mocking the Lord your God is a dangerous game to play sir. please reconsider doing that because im worried for you if you dont. i hate the thoughts of any body going to hell an i dont want to see you end up there. God be with you an hopeful change your heart
Yous words no make since fur mine. TRY better an drop the alt. We can have a sincere, honest conversation on the topic. But…. Yer grammar no good and me can’t brain it genius.
(12-30-2022, 04:23 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Yous words no make since fur mine. TRY better an drop the alt. We can have a sincere, honest conversation on the topic. But…. Yer grammar no good and me can’t brain it genius.
if mockery is all you got. you got nothing at all. mock me an God all you want. see were that gets you on judgement day
(01-01-2023, 10:05 PM)Leon Wrote: if mockery is all you got. you got nothing at all. mock me an God all you want. see were that gets you on judgement day
there no need mock. leon no care bout words, so why his opinion more than trash he write down here? leon no leon no real.
Just how literally are we supposed to take the bible? Because I can't help but notice that MTG is a woman who has committed adultery, and despite being vehement that we need to be a Christian nation she remains alive despite the book of Leviticus calling for her execution.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
![[Image: 51209558878_91a895e0bb_m.jpg]](https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51209558878_91a895e0bb_m.jpg)
