• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Because GAF Hates Jesus.

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Macam

Banned
This popped up in my RSS feed this morning, and as an atheist, it amused me. Though it's been discussed before, the ties into recent events and given the hard shove mainstream America seems to have taken to the religious right, I found it to be echoing a lot of the kinds of things that come into my head after an event such as Katrina. This came across to me as less of an attack on God and more of a sampling of an atheist's point of view, though be forewarned there's certainly a degree of righteousness thrown in. So here it is:

The following is an excerpt from An Atheist Manifesto, to be published at www.truthdig.com in December.

Somewhere in the world a man has abducted a little girl. Soon he will rape, torture, and kill her. If an atrocity of this kind not occurring at precisely this moment, it will happen in a few hours, or days at most.

Such is the confidence we can draw from the statistical laws that govern the lives of six billion human beings. The same statistics also suggest that this girl’s parents believe -- at this very moment -- that an all-powerful and all-loving God is watching over them and their family. Are they right to believe this? Is it good that they believe this?
No.

The entirety of atheism is contained in this response. Atheism is not a philosophy; it is not even a view of the world; it is simply a refusal to deny the obvious. Unfortunately, we live in a world in which the obvious is overlooked as a matter of principle. The obvious must be observed and re-observed and argued for. This is a thankless job. It carries with it an aura of petulance and insensitivity. It is, moreover, a job that the atheist does not want.

It is worth noting that no one ever need identify himself as a non-astrologer or a non-alchemist. Consequently, we do not have words for people who deny the validity of these pseudo-disciplines. Likewise, “atheism” is a term that should not even exist. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make when in the presence of religious dogma. The atheist is merely a person who believes that the 260 million Americans (eighty-seven percent of the population) who claim to “never doubt the existence of God” should be obliged to present evidence for his existence -- and, indeed, for his benevolence, given the relentless destruction of innocent human beings we witness in the world each day. Only the atheist appreciates just how uncanny our situation is: most of us believe in a God that is every bit as specious as the gods of Mount Olympus; no person, whatever his or her qualifications, can seek public office in the United States without pretending to be certain that such a God exists; and much of what passes for public policy in our country conforms to religious taboos and superstitions appropriate to a medieval theocracy. Our circumstance is abject, indefensible, and terrifying. It would be hilarious if the stakes were not so high.

Consider: the city of New Orleans was recently destroyed by hurricane Katrina. At least a thousand people died, tens of thousands lost all their earthly possessions, and over a million have been displaced. It is safe to say that almost every person living in New Orleans at the moment Katrina struck believed in an omnipotent, omniscient, and compassionate God. But what was God doing while a hurricane laid waste to their city? Surely He heard the prayers of those elderly men and women who fled the rising waters for the safety of their attics, only to be slowly drowned there. These were people of faith. These were good men and women who had prayed throughout their lives. Only the atheist has the courage to admit the obvious: these poor people spent their lives in the company of an imaginary friend.

Of course, there had been ample warning that a storm “of biblical proportions” would strike New Orleans, and the human response to the ensuing disaster was tragically inept. But it was inept only by the light of science. Advance warning of Katrina’s path was wrested from mute Nature by meteorological calculations and satellite imagery. God told no one of his plans. Had the residents of New Orleans been content to rely on the beneficence of the Lord, they wouldn’t have known that a killer hurricane was bearing down upon them until they felt the first gusts of wind on their faces. And yet, a poll conducted by The Washington Post found that eighty percent of Katrina’s survivors claim that the event has only strengthened their faith in God.

As hurricane Katrina was devouring New Orleans, nearly a thousand Shiite pilgrims were trampled to death on a bridge in Iraq. There can be no doubt that these pilgrims believed mightily in the God of the Koran. Indeed, their lives were organized around the indisputable fact of his existence: their women walked veiled before him; their men regularly murdered one another over rival interpretations of his word. It would be remarkable if a single survivor of this tragedy lost his faith. More likely, the survivors imagine that they were spared through God’s grace.

Only the atheist recognizes the boundless narcissism and self-deceit of the saved. Only the atheist realizes how morally objectionable it is for survivors of a catastrophe to believe themselves spared by a loving God, while this same God drowned infants in their cribs. Because he refuses to cloak the reality of the world’s suffering in a cloying fantasy of eternal life, the atheist feels in his bones just how precious life is -- and, indeed, how unfortunate it is that millions of human beings suffer the most harrowing abridgements of their happiness for no good reason at all.

Of course, people of faith regularly assure one another that God is not responsible for human suffering. But how else can we understand the claim that God is both omniscient and omnipotent? There is no other way, and it is time for sane human beings to own up to this. This is the age-old problem of theodicy, of course, and we should consider it solved. If God exists, either He can do nothing to stop the most egregious calamities, or He does not care to. God, therefore, is either impotent or evil. Pious readers will now execute the following pirouette: God cannot be judged by merely human standards of morality. But, of course, human standards of morality are precisely what the faithful use to establish God’s goodness in the first place. And any God who could concern himself with something as trivial as gay marriage, or the name by which he is addressed in prayer, is not as inscrutable as all that. If He exists, the God of Abraham is not merely unworthy of the immensity of creation; he is unworthy even of man.

There is another possibility, of course, and it is both the most reasonable and least odious: the biblical God is a fiction. As Richard Dawkins has observed, we are all atheists with respect to Zeus and Thor. Only the atheist has realized that the biblical god is no different. Consequently, only the atheist is compassionate enough to take the profundity of the world’s suffering at face value. It is terrible that we all die and lose everything we love; it is doubly terrible that so many human beings suffer needlessly while alive. That so much of this suffering can be directly attributed to religion -- to religious hatreds, religious wars, religious delusions, and religious diversions of scarce resources -- is what makes atheism a moral and intellectual necessity. It is a necessity, however, that places the atheist at the margins of society. The atheist, by merely being in touch with reality, appears shamefully out of touch with the fantasy life of his neighbors.
Click to expand...
 
Somewhere in the world a man has abducted a little girl. Soon he will rape, torture, and kill her. If an atrocity of this kind not occurring at precisely this moment, it will happen in a few hours, or days at most.

Such is the confidence we can draw from the statistical laws that govern the lives of six billion human beings. The same statistics also suggest that this girl’s parents believe -- at this very moment -- that an all-powerful and all-loving God is watching over them and their family. Are they right to believe this? Is it good that they believe this? No.
Click to expand...

Lame. The entire quoted bit begs the question, so IMO it's pointless as a read--it's just reasserting an opinion. I read it and ask, so what? This question has literally been asked since man could intellectually reflect upon his environment. Falling back on one of the oldest bits in the book--"why do bad things happen to good people"--as a justification for your belief system (or disbelief, in this case) is fairly mindless at this point and certainly doesn't offer an interesting perspective--just as offering the watchmaker proof as justification for your disbelief in evolution/etc is mindless and insipid. It's the religious/philosophical equivalent to regurgitating talking-points.
 
"a poll conducted by The Washington Post found that eighty percent of Katrina’s survivors claim that the event has only strengthened their faith in God."
cast.jpg


"Look, i'm not coming to you Baptists church Lynn... you _always_ try to get people when they're down..."
 
I'm an agnostic and still am, but I must admit that it was a very interesting read which made me think about my beliefs, and admit that I only cling to agnosticism out of fear of the alternative, and nothing more noble than that.
 
Even though I agree with most everything said in there, it's presented too smugly to really change anyone's mind or anything like that.

I still don't agree with the last part there, that religion is responsible for so much suffering. Sure it has its bad points, but I think on the balance religion has helped people far far more than it has hurt.

In general, most religious people out there just aren't strong enough to admit the truth to themselves, and I'm not going to hold that against them. It's a hard thing to admit.
 
What an idiotic article. I'm a full on alchemy-agnostic, Zeus-agnostic, Thor-agnostic, and astrology-agnostic. Difference is, a large number of fellow Americans are always trying to sell me on the CHRISTIAN GOD and His associated bill of fare, not Zeus, Thor, the power of celestial magic, or material transmutation. Likewise, I don't regularly encounter the Zeus/Thor/astrology/alchemy set trying to curtail my public and private freedoms in the name of their weird-ass faith -- but when they do, they'll get an earful, and I'll wear my Thor-agnostic badge clearly on my sleeve.

Take that, Thunder God fanboys!

That said, I find people using natural disasters and genocide as proof against God rather disingenuous. All such events prove is that life sucks and that looking for constancy amid the chaos of existence is a futile endeavor; and that your time is better spent worrying about how to deal with circumstance in a positive fashion than railing against a no-God.
 
You haven't incurred my wrath. People write dumb articles all the time. I'm more inclined to get belligerent about the patently stupid ones used to justify ignorance -- like most anything Glenn Reynolds posts on his site -- than those clearly but disingenuously pointing out obvious fallacies in "atheism".

Likewise, I don't hate Jesus. The character of Jesus rocks, and if the real Jesus was anything like his portrayal in the Bible, then he most certainly is a figure worthy of respect and emulation. Hey, I'd hang with him if he'd put up with me. In fact, I kinda wish Christians would take him more seriously and actually try to act like him, instead of constantly using their own human failings to excuse how often they seem to fall short of the bar he set. "Forgive me, Lord, I've sinned -- yet again." A pity that convenient and soon-forgotten remorse is all it takes to make one worthy in many Christian denominations these days (despite their practitioners' insistence otherwise).
 
Oh holy hell, I'm an idiot. My sarcasm meter is working overtime -- I thought the article was a PARODY of atheism written by a person of faith.

That said, even if it was written by an atheist, it's still rather puerile. Why give any credence to a specific theological perspective by spending undue energy trying to refute it? You don't waste time trying to refute the existence of God any more than you spend time trying to refute the existence of Darth Vader. It's a pompous, prideful exercise, and all too indicitave of hardline atheisms impracticality. Focus on the RESULTS of Christianity, not on dogma, which is by its nature perfectly resilient and inarguable.

Whatever. Punching myself in the face right now. Ow. Ow. Ow.
 
Humanity's existence in this world's been one of agony throughout countless millenia, ever since it came to this world. If other animals possess some semblance of a consciousness, it's clear the number of minds that've felt agony in this world is otherworldy.

If we look into the future we see that civilization may decay, returning us to the dark ages, and the horrors of the past. Should modern civilization prosper, otherworldly power will inundate the land, bringing forth unfanthomable hells into this world. As absolute power over another becomes possible(even to the most intimate lvls of the mind.), and lifespans extend indefinitely. It will be as was, as is, and as shall most likely be, a few will be privileged and live a prolongued hedonistic existence, while the majority will probably be screwed. Lose-Lose scenario if humanity survives, unless I'm missing something.

In sum:
One could say, that life's like a great ocean with few scattered pleasurable isles amidst a great sea of torment and tedium.


PS

As for God and tragedy, the religious would probably respond as always:
"God works in mysterious ways" and "God took them to his grace, their time had come."

PPS

My response would be:

The beauty of this world, and the intricate laws that govern it are such a wonderful masterpiece that a God, if such would be, trascendent, if he could, would probably consider it 'not to be worth it to tarnish such, and violate causality, logic, etc... to safe a few short-lived creatures.'. Especially if infinite universes turns out to be the final truth, making it such that it would be pointless also (it's inevitable that infinite evil will exist along with the good as an intrinsic property of the whole, of existence would such be the case).

ed
 
Drinky Crow said:
Oh holy hell, I'm an idiot. My sarcasm meter is working overtime -- I thought the article was a PARODY of atheism written by a person of faith.

That said, even if it was written by an atheist, it's still rather puerile. Why give any credence to a specific theological perspective by spending undue energy trying to refute it? You don't waste time trying to refute the existence of God any more than you spend time trying to refute the existence of Darth Vader. It's a pompous, prideful exercise, and all too indicitave of hardline atheisms impracticality.

Whatever. Punching myself in the face right now. Ow. Ow. Ow.
Click to expand...

Why? Maybe cause its fun, entertaining? If we can sit here and talk about comic characters and Lohan's breasts, both of which dont exist (unfortunatly), why cant you poke fun at religious mythology.

Edit: Besides, the PoE argument is only valid for an omni-max god that Christians believe in - the Jews and Muslims make no claim for an 'all-loving' god - atleast they are consitent with their source material.
 
Drinky Crow said:
Oh holy hell, I'm an idiot. My sarcasm meter is working overtime -- I thought the article was a PARODY of atheism written by a person of faith.

That said, even if it was written by an atheist, it's still rather puerile. Why give any credence to a specific theological perspective by spending undue energy trying to refute it? You don't waste time trying to refute the existence of God any more than you spend time trying to refute the existence of Darth Vader. It's a pompous, prideful exercise, and all too indicitave of hardline atheisms impracticality. Focus on the RESULTS of Christianity, not on dogma, which is by its nature perfectly resilient and inarguable.

Whatever. Punching myself in the face right now. Ow. Ow. Ow.
Click to expand...
Yikes, man. You're being too hard on yourself.
 
I don't have any problem mocking religion. Hardline atheism, however, while seemingly rational on the surface, is a Sisyphusian exercise, and by focusing your energy on one particular belief -- the Christian God -- and warring against dogma itself which is designed to rebuff folks like you, you aren't getting anywhere. Why try to disprove what you've already acknowledged doesn't exist? You're just strangling yourself with contradictory and endlessly recursive rhetoric, and you're inevitably going to resort to dogma yourself. The best way to kill a faith is to ignore it, instead of advertising it with controversy. No religion ever died because someone shouted "Tiamat doesn't exist!" at the top of their lungs ad nauseum.
 
Why not bitch about Mithras? Technically speaking he's the oldest "living" god, making ye olde Judeo-Christian omnipotence/omniscience look like a mere babe.
 
Drinky Crow said:
You haven't incurred my wrath. People write dumb articles all the time. I'm more inclined to get belligerent about the patently stupid ones used to justify ignorance -- like most anything Glenn Reynolds posts on his site -- than those clearly but disingenuously pointing out obvious fallacies in "atheism".
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm aware I haven't really incurred your wrath. I'd have to quote Ayn Rand before I could do that, but nonetheless, your belligerence is always welcome. With the absence of the OT's past wordsmiths, you have a gap to fill and you fill it well.

Besides, I agree with you. There's little point in attempting to disprove something that doesn't exist in your view, and those portions of the article that do so are the weaker points of it; admittedly the excerpt spends a good chunk of time doing so. That said, I liked the excerpt primarily for putting things in context from an atheist's view; I think there's a general misconception that lacking religion or spirituality leads to a vapid sort of existence. Namely, the one quote that stuck out to me was:

"Because he refuses to cloak the reality of the world’s suffering in a cloying fantasy of eternal life, the atheist feels in his bones just how precious life is -- and, indeed, how unfortunate it is that millions of human beings suffer the most harrowing abridgements of their happiness for no good reason at all."
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to rally atheists here in a sort of "pat yourself on the back" moment, but I liked seeing some of the viewpoints articulated.
 
Is it not possible for God to punish people for serious levels of sin? Maybe things like this are happening to wake people up? Nope, couldn't be that.


JayFro
 
Bataman said:
I like where ths thread is going. Diablos cast Demi, which could never kill. Unless... unless it's used against someone with 1HP. heh, Diablos owns Demi.
Click to expand...
hahaha :lol :lol :lol

Macam, check your PM's buddy.

Here's my ultimate question about God. If he lives in the holy lovely kingdom that is Heaven... that does not know evil, that is pure, etc. etc... then why is it that when he creates us, we have to live HERE, in this pit of a world that we live in, a balance of heaven and hell on a constant basis? Why not just create us and leave our souls in heaven where they'll always be? Any caring, loving God that makes us have to endure this world before we can get back into the place where we were created can't be that caring or loving!

But no, instead this life is supposed to be some test that determines if we go to heaven or hell when we're dead. What kind of sick person would do that? You're created pure, then put on Earth, a place where, depending on the circumstances, can render you into a terrible person, and makes us all "sinners." What's the point?

It just doesn't make sense when you put it all together.

JayFro: I'm assuming you said the people who died were told to "wake up" by God? So that was their ticket to hell, eh?

Anyway, much like Drinky said (and I'm glad he brought it up): The idea of Jesus does not upset me. I don't "hate" Jesus. What I hate is how people always CHANGE religion to match their personal view and THEN more or less force that upon people. That's not right. I think religion can be good, it teaches lots of values and principals that can help us all. What I don't think is good are the people who take it so very seriously that they become the biggest, most disgusting moral hippocrates you'd ever see. Organized religion for the most part disgusts me. It's so cult-like. Whatever happened to one's religion being between himself and God? There are too many different kind of religions in the world. It's so dumb. I don't think God would want his children fighting over which Church has the better idea of his history and intentions. Nor would I think that any God would want himself to be represented as multiple people/things (Jesus, Allah, nature, whatever.)
 
Ah, the good ol' argument against God based on the existence of evil.


What gets me are the religious people who always try to defend their belief in God against this argument by attributing a reason or justification to God, when the Bible itself is pretty clear that God will do what God wants to do regardless of how fucked up it seems to us.

The major leap of faith is not believing God exists, but rather that God is all good and not the complete asshole He seems to be from down here.
 
I propose we start a GAF religion in which videogame summon creatures and bosses are deities. We can all decide which member of the pantheon we're gonna follow.

Okay, I pick House of Bahamut for myself! Dragon, rawr!

Now then, we need to have a bloody holy war over which deity is actually the head of all the houses. Who wants to declare the first fatwa? Don't be shy! When GAFers sacrifice themselves in holy combat, they go to paradise where game publisher press agents actually release proper movies and Raiden was never in Metal Gear Solid 2 :) Also, there will be virgins*.





*Those being the GAFers.
 
Atheists don't realize that the concept of God is not someone who is babysitting his creations. He's given everyone the capacity to do good or evil. It's up to the individual to use his/her gifts/blessings in the manner they are accustomed to. He's also given us the intelligence to develop scientific methods and theories that can predict disasters and the willpower to overcome them. In the end it's up to the many individuals of the world to work together towards these goals. It's very similar to the basic concept* of communism. Everyone has equal rights and responsibilities.

* Not the distorted execution of communism that we've seen in various forms.
 
Note: This is a big post but I'm not in this for a debate, I'm only trying to clear up some things about what a biblical christian faith (something not many have) looks like. Now, on to my post...


It's so easy to beat up a strawman.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.

Who ever said God was omni-benevolent? That he is only capable of making the world a happy shiny place for you? He is just and yet he also shows grace, he can do both with full right. It would be perfectly just of him to destroy us all--after all, we rejected him, the only source of life and anything good--so wouldn't that leave us with death and everything bad by our own choice? And yet He still sees fit to hold back ultimate destruction for many and show mercy and grace to many and put many good things in this world.

"But what about those people who died in < insert unfortunate event >?"

That's a question that presumes life is all about us, but that is incorrect. We are not the point, God is the point and he will carry out his plans for himself (good thing for us that doing what he pleases included loving and dying for us).

Isaiah 46
10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come.
I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.
11 From the east I summon a bird of prey; from a far-off land, a man to fulfill my purpose.
What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that will I do.

Daniel 4:35
All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing.
He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth.
No one can hold back his hand or say to him: "What have you done?"

Ezekiel 36:22
"Therefore say to the house of Israel, 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am going to do these things, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you have gone. 23 I will show the holiness of my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, the name you have profaned among them. Then the nations will know that I am the LORD, declares the Sovereign LORD, when I show myself holy through you before their eyes.

Romans 9
22What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

How could God not be in control? You know the Nature vs. Nurture thing? He made them both. He knew that if he put a tomato in the middle of a field in spain how that would affect you personally. He knew it would happen by the way things were made and what people would decide. Oh, but doesn't that mean we're a bunch of robots? Does he force our hand? Well scripture says that's definitely not true, we make our decisions and are responsible for them, and one of those decisions are whether or not we receive Christ's grace. But how can we choose and God be in control at the same time? Well that's simple: We don't know.

The fact is a lot of things about God don't make sense to our minds. Being triune doesnt make sense, being at all points of time at the same time and beyond doesnt make sense, being everywhere at once doesnt make sense, knowing everything doesnt make sense if carried out to certain extents. Of course, it's not like these things are limited to God, even without thinking he's there we'd have to assume that matter is eternal because that's the nature of existence. It doesn't make complete sense, but hey, here we are so we have to accept it.

But anyway, like all these other aspects of God that don't make sense, sovereignty coexisting with man's freedom is the same. We want to think cause-and-effect to the end in our minds, but could there be two causes to each effect with responsibility falling wherever he says it does? Indeed there could, and if you don't really get how that works, great! You have a biblical perspective.

Isaiah 55
8 "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD.
9 "As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.
10 As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater,
11 so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.

What he says goes, and that seems incompatible in a world of wills and free choices but it's apparently over our heads like the heavens are above the earth. Philosophers try to get into it with compatibilism, but we can only get so far. So does God love us? Yes, he loves you more than you'll ever know, enough to come down here and take your own mess on himself as well as the punishment for it. But also enough to let you do what you want and reject that yet again if you so wish.

The whole idea of tragedy debunking God is ridiculous anyway, because it implies an injustice that will never be made right--it's a simple lack of trust. The extent of evil and misfortune in this world is more than we can wrap our head around, but we have to accept it anyway because that's where things stand. Well, if you can do that regarding this finite world, why can't you trust that a God who is infinite in all respects can bring a satisfying and worthwhile justice in the end? How many times does he have to say that his plans aren't finished before you accept it?

Oh, but then it seems like God can't make up his mind, doesn't it? Does he want you to be saved or does he want to finish things up? Well you probably shouldn't think of God in such static ways. You have priorities that override certain desires, right? Well it seems that God does as well, and he'll let bad things happen to bring about his greater purposes. It seems that there are two wills in God, there is a sovereign (decretive, immutable) will that is always accomplished and works to his ultimate ends, and a dispositional (declarative, moral) will that is a stance on each individual case. These two are contrasted most clearly in Christ's being crucified.

Acts 2:23 This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.

Acts 4:27-28 Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

He planned beforehand for Christ to be crucified, and even knew which people it would be done by, but does that mean he was pleased by their actions of murder? No, of course not. He was displeased by the action and yet pleased by his plans working out to the ultimate ends. Think of it like looking through two lesnes: One lens where things are close up and you see some things are beautiful and pleasing then some things ugly and displeasing, but then you look through the other lens and it's further back showing every piece making a beautiful mosaic. I think this is how the old puritan Jonathan Edwards described it and it's even further demonstrated by passages like Proverbs 16:4.

If that's still not enough for you, look in Luke 16:19-31. Did God fail the poor man because he died in poverty? No, of course not. See, you'll always run into problems if you 1) keep looking at God as a man 2) seeing the earth at this moment as the entire picture or 3) seeing mankind as the point of all existence. That, and you'll also always get unsatisfying answers if you only ask some layman about deep theological issues. If you want to know what a faith teaches look at what was taught by those who founded it. A layman's understanding of a religion is only an example of his thoughts, not an authoritative example of the religion. And again just to be absolutely clear...

Job 42:1-6
Then Job replied to the LORD : "I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted. You asked, 'Who is this that obscures my counsel without knowledge?' Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know.
"You said, 'Listen now, and I will speak; I will question you, and you shall answer me.' My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you. Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes."

Yeah so God doesn't actively cause evil to happen, but yes he did create beings knowing that they would choose evil. The fact is, if it's true his plans are never thwarted, then that means evil is not a disruption to him, but an element which he is in control of--a free-flowing force that he can restrain or let loose and yet will ultimately work toward his desire of ultimate good and justice in the end. His allowence of it, this letting loose is how the book of Job started, so it makes sense that Job would be saying this. Evil doesn't make God bad, it merely shows the consequences for rejecting God and allows for him to demonstrate the goodness of his justice, patience, mercy, grace and ultimate victory.
 
trippingmartian said:
Atheists don't realize that the concept of God is not someone who is babysitting his creations.
Click to expand...

I say this not to be rude, but frankly, I suspect most atheists probably don't care any more about that aspect than they do about how many Keebler elves there really are in that tree.
 
Macam said:
I say this not to be rude, but frankly, I suspect most atheists probably don't care any more about that aspect than they do about how many Keebler elves there really are in that tree.
Click to expand...
You do realize I was referring specifically to questions asked by atheists "if there is a God then why does _____ happen?" Obviously they care enough to pose an occasional question.
 
This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:

John: "Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."
Mary: Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."
Me: "Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"
John: "If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the shit out of you."
Me: "What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"
John: "Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."
Me: "That doesn't make any sense. Why..."
Mary: "Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"
Me: "Well maybe, if it's legit, but..."
John: "Then come kiss Hank's ass with us."
Me: "Do you kiss Hank's ass often?"
Mary: "Oh yes, all the time..."
Me: "And has He given you a million dollars?"
John: "Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."
Me: "So why don't you just leave town now?"
Mary: "You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the shit out of you."
Me: "Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's ass, left town, and got the million dollars?"
John: "My mother kissed Hank's ass for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."
Me: "Haven't you talked to her since then?"
John: "Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."
Me: "So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"
Mary: "Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."
Me: "What's that got to do with Hank?"
John: "Hank has certain 'connections.'"
Me: "I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."
John: "But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass He'll kick the shit out of you."
Me: "Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him..."
Mary: "No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."
Me: "Then how do you kiss His ass?"
John: "Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His ass. Other times we kiss Karl's ass, and he passes it on."
Me: "Who's Karl?"
Mary: "A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's ass. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."
Me: "And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His ass, and that Hank would reward you?"
John: "Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."




quote:

From the desk of Karl

Kiss Hank's ass and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.
Use alcohol in moderation.
Kick the shit out of people who aren't like you.
Eat right.
Hank dictated this list Himself.
The moon is made of green cheese.
Everything Hank says is right.
Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
Don't use alcohol.
Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.
Kiss Hank's ass or He'll kick the shit out of you.





Me: "This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."
Mary: "Hank didn't have any paper."
Me: "I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."
John: "Of course, Hank dictated it."
Me: "I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"
Mary: "Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."
Me: "I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the shit out of people just because they're different?"
Mary: "It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."
Me: "How do you figure that?"
Mary:"Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"
Me:"Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."
John: "No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."
Me: "But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green cheese,' which is just plain wrong."
John: "There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."
Me: "Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock..."
Mary: "But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green cheese."
Me: "I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it cheese."
John: "Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"
Me: "We do?"
Mary: "Of course we do, Item 7 says so."
Me: "You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"
John: "Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."
Me: "But...oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"
Mary: She blushes.
John: "Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."
Me: "What if I don't have a bun?"
John: "No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."
Me: "No relish? No Mustard?"
Mary: She looks positively stricken.
John: He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"
Me: "So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"
Mary: Sticks her fingers in her ears."I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."
John: "That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that..."
Me: "It's good! I eat it all the time."
Mary: She faints.
John: He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the shit out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's ass for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."

With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.
 
It's quite possible that a sentient process created the universe but permits bad things to happen to "innocent" people because it just doesn't give a shit about us, at least not on a personal level. So the argument doesn't disprove the existence of a creator per se, but it is a compelling argument against the existence of a god that would be worthy of our worship.
 
Atheists don't realize that the concept of God is not someone who is babysitting his creations. He's given everyone the capacity to do good or evil.
Click to expand...

God wouldn't need to permit famine, natural disasters or disease to give us the capacity for moral freedom.
 
Azrael said:
It's quite possible that a sentient process created the universe but permits bad things to happen to "innocent" people because it just doesn't give a shit about us, at least not on a personal level. So the argument doesn't disprove the existence of a creator per se, but it is a compelling argument against the existence of a god that would be worthy of our worship.
Click to expand...

Or maybe the relative millisecond of life we spend on Earth--as opposed to the eternety we allegedly spend in Heaven--is meaningless in the large scheme of things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Perspective_Vortex
 
If God did something during Katrina, it would surely beg the question as to why he refuses to intervene in the third world, where the extreme poverty takes its toll every day. Either that'd be too big of a job for even God to tackle or he is just media-savvy.

This would be like the show Touched by an Angel, a show depicting angels inexplicably helping people who are pretty well off by global standards. A son and a dad have stopped talking to each other! That surely takes precedence over famine, disease and civil war. :lol
 
Ok Dice. Without quoting scripture what can you tell us about God?

What kind of God is he? What characteristics does he possess?

Where did he come from? What is his plan in relation to us?

How is he worthy of adoration?

Where is natural proof and evidence that can be verified on a scientific and logical sense of God?

How do you know that the Bible is the word of God?


and just as a tangent...

Do all christians believe in the same God? Even if some insist that there is no devil while others insist that there is, and that some don't even believe he is necessarily all Good.

If he is all good, then is it in a different sense to what we understand? It must be; suffering exists, thus he cannot be all good. Then instead of redefining our idea of all good... isn't what God is different altogether?

How do you know your conception of God is the correct one? A wrathful God? a benevolent God? It seems to me you can label something the same but not be thinking about the same thing. Are you all worshipping the same God? Or just personal dieties in the image of an abrahamic God?
 
God wouldn't need to permit famine, natural disasters or disease to give us the capacity for moral freedom.
Click to expand...
What is there to permit? I'm sure you have some understanding of the scientific explications of all these phenomena? This is the world, this is the world where these things happen. 'Why couldn't we not have earthquakes?" - Now who wants to live in a fantasy land?

The way god works is like this. God is existence itself, and you should worship it with every fibre of your being. It is really vitally important that you do this: for your own good, for the good of us all. Really. Vitally. Sadly the varied means of broadcasting these facts, devised milennia ago specifically to reach as many people as possible, and hold them in beneficent thrall, have lost virtually all value, and not been upgraded or replaced. These days having faith in existence, and acting on that faith, is like trying to watch the Simpsons on a broken radio. And all that religious / atheistical debates boil down to is bickering over who has the remote; why the picture is all crappy; why it makes no sense any more.

Picture the world around you briefly. How well can you put it together in your imagination? These days a lot of people are able to do it quite well, in an abstract sort of way. Three dimensions, four; all eleven (is it eleven? My cosmology is appalling). Time electrifying them withal. Infinite possibilities branching ahead of the microscopic choices open to the billions of sentients on this planet alone. There is good here, and evil, and we understand both intimately. Just think of them as pleasure and pain: no more is necessary. Imagine that the shining light of all that is beautiful and good about existence is ahead of you, out of sight, but pulsing, throbbing, drawing you towards it like a moth to a flame. You can also imagine the infinite terrors which Lovecraft and others have had the courage to make flesh; you can sense them twenty paces behind you.

It is only you who can navigate reality between these two poles, and you must do so for all of your life. During this life you may beget children, and when you die they will inherit your work. In this way, and in the clear fact that no faculties you currently possess can ever disappear from the face of existence, you have been condemned to eternity. But get this: you can - we can, together - bring the inhabitants of reality closer and closer in towards the light. There is no limit to how much we can bless ourselves, if we can provide enough reasons to understand that we deserve it. Or we can cast ourselves collectively down into the wretched dark, as in times of war. We do not possess the power of true volition, but our environment is a literal reflection of our will, and if we have the strength and intellect to work together to realise it, we can abide in a world that is, for want of a word that does the concept the merest scrap of justice, 'better'.

This is all that religions have tried to speak of. It really is vitally important.
 
B-B-Bomba! said:
What is there to permit? I'm sure you have some understanding of the scientific explications of all these phenomena? This is the world, this is the world where these things happen. 'Why couldn't we not have earthquakes?" - Now who wants to live in a fantasy land?

The way god works is like this. God is existence itself, and you should worship it with every fibre of your being. It is really vitally important that you do this: for your own good, for the good of us all. Really. Vitally. Sadly the varied means of broadcasting these facts, devised milennia ago specifically to reach as many people as possible, and hold them in beneficent thrall, have lost virtually all value, and not been upgraded or replaced. These days having faith in existence, and acting on that faith, is like trying to watch the Simpsons on a broken radio. And all that religious / atheistical debates boil down to is bickering over who has the remote; why the picture is all crappy; why it makes no sense any more.

Picture the world around you briefly. How well can you put it together in your imagination? These days a lot of people are able to do it quite well, in an abstract sort of way. Three dimensions, four; all eleven (is it eleven? My cosmology is appalling). Time electrifying them withal. Infinite possibilities branching ahead of the microscopic choices open to the billions of sentients on this planet alone. There is good here, and evil, and we understand both intimately. Just think of them as pleasure and pain: no more is necessary. Imagine that the shining light of all that is beautiful and good about existence is ahead of you, out of sight, but pulsing, throbbing, drawing you towards it like a moth to a flame. You can also imagine the infinite terrors which Lovecraft and others have had the courage to make flesh; you can sense them twenty paces behind you.

It is only you who can navigate reality between these two poles, and you must do so for all of your life. During this life you may beget children, and when you die they will inherit your work. In this way, and in the clear fact that no faculties you currently possess can ever disappear from the face of existence, you have been condemned to eternity. But get this: you can - we can, together - bring the inhabitants of reality closer and closer in towards the light. There is no limit to how much we can bless ourselves, if we can provide enough reasons to understand that we deserve it. Or we can cast ourselves collectively down into the wretched dark, as in times of war. We do not possess the power of true volition, but our environment is a literal reflection of our will, and if we have the strength and intellect to work together to realise it, we can abide in a world that is, for want of a word that does the concept the merest scrap of justice, 'better'.

This is all that religions have tried to speak of. It really is vitally important.
Click to expand...

Dude.

Shut. the. fuck. up. If you're going to have a mind dump on a subject keep it short and with easier to comprehend language. If you can't coalese the thoughts into proper logic then don't bother pretending like it makes sense.
 
This argument will go on till the end of time. Both sides just take tid bits of what the other is saying to prove their point. Take things out of context. Intelligent Design does it to the theory of evolution. Atheists do it to the bible. People arguing agaisnt evolution just say well if people come from monkeys why are there still monkeys, ignoring that in theory we come from a COMMON ancestor. Atheists may say the bible is inconsistent , why does Jesus say if a man strikes you turn your other cheek, but in the old testament from the SAME God says eye for an eye tooth for a tooth, ignoring that the scripture ACTUALLY says if two people injure an innocent party because they are in conflict they shall receive what they did to the innocent person , eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.

This is really silly if anything take this one verse from the bible with you, from dust you came and dust you shall return. We are all here for a limited time why waste it fighting and arguing, memories of these types of who's right who's wrong arguments will never be the good memories that you reflect on in the end. Just live and let live, thats one thing both sides of this atheist vs spiritual argument preach but do not practice. If i have 50 more years to live 365.25 x 50 isnt a fucking rough estimate. The End.
 
B-B-Bomba! said:
What is there to permit? I'm sure you have some understanding of the scientific explications of all these phenomena? This is the world, this is the world where these things happen. 'Why couldn't we not have earthquakes?" - Now who wants to live in a fantasy land?

The way god works is like this. God is existence itself, and you should worship it with every fibre of your being. It is really vitally important that you do this: for your own good, for the good of us all. Really. Vitally.
Click to expand...
"God is not just, God is not kind, God is not merciful, and understanding that is essential to true devotion..."

Never mind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
The Incomparable Jesus
2
177
winjer replied
Jesus, This Is The Most Saddest Plea For Help Ever...
29
472
Trogdor1123 replied
Cynthia Erivo to Play Jesus in 'Jesus Christ Superstar'
2
64
5K
E-Cat replied
2026 sober GAF
2
55
1K
Baemono replied
Merry Christmas GAF
2 3
129
2K
Setzer replied
Top Bottom