Let's Talk About Sin

#901
#901
Septic said:
I hear the free will card getting pulled from the tool belt.
Click to expand...

You would be correct. It seems to me these are all arguments by people who seek to insert for God what His ultimate goal should have been.

Edit: They seem to think that a "loving" God should have created an existence without the possibility for love.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#902
#902
Orange_Crush said:
You would be correct. It seems to me these are all arguments by people who seek to insert for God what His ultimate goal should have been.

Edit: They seem to think that a "loving" God should have created an existence without the possibility for love.
Click to expand...

Do you think that god literally put his fingers in his ears while 6mm Jews were being slaughtered?
 
#904
#904
Septic said:
I hear the free will card getting pulled from the tool belt.
Click to expand...

The problem of theodicy is insurmountable. Falling back on ideas of free will and what not is just futile mental flips where you land right back where you started. As soon as the man on TV claims that it was God that miraculously saved him from the hurricane it has to be inferred that the same God also deliberately killed thousands of others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#905
#905
Thanks OC for all your efforts here. I have been unable to post for about a week as I had a technical issue with my account. Finally got it straightened out. I have been reading this thread daily and have learned a lot from your posts. You deal with a great deal of crap here...not so much from Mustafa and Ghost who seem both to have a genuine desire for friendly discussion but from complete morons who enjoy just interjecting with smartazz oneliners that they think are clever. I am reminded as I read the posts of those who simply seek to insult you of a few things Dr. Hovind says:
AGNOSTIC : against knowledge
"Willfully ignorant" : dumb on purpose
I give credit to Mustafa and Ghost as neither has really resorted to an all too common tactic by nonbelievers of claiming an implied intellectual high ground. I think that is largely due to the way you present your views in an educated manner. I personally have learned many things from the links you have posted that have reinforced what I already believed. At some point in the future I would like to exchange email addresses as I have some things id like to ask you about as well as perhaps some things that need prayer. I won't post here as part of the debate, I tend to get aggravated and betray my own beliefs to an extent. I would rather read and learn than argue and let Him down. Thanks for all you do...God bless you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#906
#906
rjd970 said:
The problem of theodicy is insurmountable. Falling back on ideas of free will and what not is just futile mental flips where you land right back where you started. As soon as the man on TV claims that it was God that miraculously saved him from the hurricane it has to be inferred that the same God also deliberately killed thousands of others.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#908
#908
rjd970 said:
The problem of theodicy is insurmountable. Falling back on ideas of free will and what not is just futile mental flips where you land right back where you started. As soon as the man on TV claims that it was God that miraculously saved him from the hurricane it has to be inferred that the same God also deliberately killed thousands of others.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, I have the same problem as you do. But what does that have to do with whether or not there is a creator, and then whether or not the Bible's God is that creator?

Here is the real problem. In a secular humanist world there is no way to account for the inherent value of human life. None. Yet an argument for theodicy must first presume that human life has inherent value.
Either life has intrinsic value or it does not. If you claim it does, then account for it.
In this worldview intelligent life is no more significant than bacteria. Any 'significance' is delusion. So, if there is no objective morality, then there is no ground by which to hypothesize that an Omni3 God would be unjust for decreeing mankind's destruction.

Either you really believe your naturalistic explanations for our existence or you don't. Funny that you are crying out for justice without any grounds for justice to stand on. It's arbitrary and meaningless. If mankind is really the result of unguided, unintelligent processes, then so are our thoughts, emotions, etc. And so, trying to say a god would be unjust for wiping out humanity is self-delusion. And so this position that criticizes religion for being delusional (which it can be) is advocating that we go through life......., delusional. It's just a different kind of delusion. One that is untenable, internally inconsistent and self-defeating.

They are shouting from the roof tops that this is the truth, while at the same time saying there is no truth. How does one lament evil, when their world view denies the very concept. (If it is honest that is)

Regarding Russell. All kinds of problems with his postmodern views. Under this Hitler's atrocities are no more significant than you spraying anti-bacterial cleaner on your toilet seat and killing millions of germs in the process.

To me, this is an annihilating conclusion to the believers position. These are obvious inadequacies in the face of an omnipotent creator that would care at all about his creation. And I don't expect anybody who really believes to face up to this. For instance, the Jews are still around and extremely faithful to the God of Abraham, and if such a God lets 6 million of his people get systematically murdered on an industrial scale and they still believe in his omnipotence, it’s safe to say nothing will change their mind that an all loving God is looking out for them. I think the same can be said for most believers.
Click to expand...

How do we know that the holocaust was as bad as it could have been? God also allowed people to do the right thing, which of course brought those atrocities to justice.
These are obvious, but why should God stop there? It is interesting that everyone wants God to intervene in these egregious episodes. But what if God started with you?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#909
#909
Roustabout said:
Here is the real problem. In a secular humanist world there is no way to account for the inherent value of human life. None.
Click to expand...

Holy cow. What a convoluted leap of assumption.

Using that logic one could deduce that the more secular a community the more violent and murderous it would be.

Except it's quite the opposite. The most secular nations have the lowest violent crime and murder rates.

Nice try, but no.
 
#910
#910
Septic said:
Holy cow. What a convoluted leap of assumption.

Using that logic one could deduce that the more secular a community the more violent and murderous it would be.

Except it's quite the opposite. The most secular nations have the lowest violent crime and murder rates.

Nice try, but no.
Click to expand...

Nah bro. He's right. If god isn't real, let's just start killing people. It's the most logical course of action.
 
#911
#911
Septic said:
Holy cow. What a convoluted leap of assumption.

Using that logic one could deduce that the more secular a community the more violent and murderous it would be.

Except it's quite the opposite. The most secular nations have the lowest violent crime and murder rates.

Nice try, but no.
Click to expand...

Communist Russia and Communist China send their regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#913
#913
Orange_Crush said:
Communist Russia and Communist China send their regards.
Click to expand...

Citing four different studies, Zuckerman states: "Murder rates are actually lower in more secular nations and higher in more religious nations where belief in God is widespread." He also states: "Of the top 50 safest cities in the world, nearly all are in relatively non-religious countries."

Within the United States, we see the same pattern. Citing census data, he writes: "And within America, the states with the highest murder rates tend to be the highly religious, such as Louisiana and Alabama, but the states with the lowest murder rates tend to be the among the least religious in the country, such as Vermont and Oregon."

And these findings are not limited to murder rates, as rates of all violent crime tend to be higher in "religious" states. Zuckerman also points out that atheists are very much under-represented in the American prison population (only 0.2%).
Click to expand...

Source
 
#914
#914
Orange_Crush said:
Communist Russia and Communist China send their regards.
Click to expand...

Find me a single reference in either country that being Godless was the reasoning for atrocities. Until you can, this tired, played out, nonsensical argument is still just as worthless as when it was first brought up. Same goes for the Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot nonsense. Those atrocities were committed for social, racial, and political dogmas. Not because they didn't believe in a supreme being and the only way to know true morality was through him/her/it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#915
#915
Roustabout said:
Believe it or not, I have the same problem as you do. But what does that have to do with whether or not there is a creator, and then whether or not the Bible's God is that creator?

Here is the real problem. In a secular humanist world there is no way to account for the inherent value of human life. None. Yet an argument for theodicy must first presume that human life has inherent value.
Either life has intrinsic value or it does not. If you claim it does, then account for it.
In this worldview intelligent life is no more significant than bacteria. Any 'significance' is delusion. So, if there is no objective morality, then there is no ground by which to hypothesize that an Omni3 God would be unjust for decreeing mankind's destruction.

Either you really believe your naturalistic explanations for our existence or you don't. Funny that you are crying out for justice without any grounds for justice to stand on. It's arbitrary and meaningless. If mankind is really the result of unguided, unintelligent processes, then so are our thoughts, emotions, etc. And so, trying to say a god would be unjust for wiping out humanity is self-delusion. And so this position that criticizes religion for being delusional (which it can be) is advocating that we go through life......., delusional. It's just a different kind of delusion. One that is untenable, internally inconsistent and self-defeating.

They are shouting from the roof tops that this is the truth, while at the same time saying there is no truth. How does one lament evil, when their world view denies the very concept. (If it is honest that is)

Regarding Russell. All kinds of problems with his postmodern views. Under this Hitler's atrocities are no more significant than you spraying anti-bacterial cleaner on your toilet seat and killing millions of germs in the process.



How do we know that the holocaust was as bad as it could have been? God also allowed people to do the right thing, which of course brought those atrocities to justice.
These are obvious, but why should God stop there? It is interesting that everyone wants God to intervene in these egregious episodes. But what if God started with you?
Click to expand...

Baloney. Secular reasoning for the respect of life can be nicely articulated through the prism of human suffering and happiness. One can easily account for it in that way. You can call it opinion all you want, but the very fact that you decide to follow a certain belief structure as a moral guide is also a matter of opinion.

And I have been down this road before in the other thread. Being secular doesn't mean one has to admit there is no objective morality. There very well might be. Whether you call a certain belief system as objective or not, it is still a matter of opinion and a conscious decision to follow such a set of rules or believe they may be a true representation of that transcendent morality. In that sense, you opinion is no different than a humanists, you are just following something that is written down as your interpretation. Following civil/criminal law would be just as incorrect to label "objective" yet it is serving the same purpose as a holy book. Then the entire argument of the validity of the supreme being that inspired the holy book comes into question, which is a whole other argument. Nevertheless, it is arrogant to assume that you belief system is "objective" and somebody who doesn't believe in a supreme being has no place to offer opinions. It is arrogance with wings.

I can shout from the rooftops all day long the holocaust was bad, and I don't need a belief in a supreme being for that to be valid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#916
#916
Roustabout said:
How do we know that the holocaust was as bad as it could have been? God also allowed people to do the right thing, which of course brought those atrocities to justice.
These are obvious, but why should God stop there? It is interesting that everyone wants God to intervene in these egregious episodes. But what if God started with you?
Click to expand...

This is just lazy philosophy. As bad as it could have been? Seriously? Heaven forbid 7 million Jews weren't killed. 6mm is fine, but we just can't have 7mm. And we should all be thanking him for "allowing" people do the right thing, and dismiss with the wave of a hand him "allowing" other people to kill 6mm of his people?

What even more interesting is everyone attributes the good intervening that happens to God, and dismisses the rest with recourse to free will and other convoluted explanations so their sacred beliefs in his love aren't tarnished.

What if God started with me? What is that supposed to mean? What if God didn't have a play in it at all, or never existed in the first place?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#917
#917
rjd970 said:
Find me a single reference in either country that being Godless was the reasoning for atrocities. Until you can, this tired, played out, nonsensical argument is still just as worthless as when it was first brought up. Same goes for the Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot nonsense. Those atrocities were committed for social, racial, and political dogmas. Not because they didn't believe in a supreme being and the only way to know true morality was through him/her/it.
Click to expand...

Bad people will do bad things. With a name to do it in, they will do it in that name. Without a name to do it in, they'll do it anyway.

:hi:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#918
#918
Orange_Crush said:
Bad people will do bad things. With a name to do it in, they will do it in that name. Without a name to do it in, they'll do it anyway.

:hi:
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. The history of religion is a nice example of this as well. But unlike the communist example, the bad things in the name of religion had chapter and verse quoted. It was done specifically with religious motivations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#919
#919
rjd970 said:
Agreed 100%. The history of religion is a nice example of this as well. But unlike the communist example, the bad things in the name of religion had chapter and verse misquoted. It was done specifically with religious motivations.
Click to expand...

Some were religious motivations. Most were political, cultural, etc, masked as religious motivations. For instance, history shows that the great crusades were very politically motivated-- as were the inquisitions, etc...

The thing is, one can read each religion's writings and see if that religion's teachings were being upheld. With atheism, that isn't available to test or judge.

I was not saying that religion is better than atheism on that front. I was saying that atheism isn't inherently 'safer' than religion. Bad people will do bad things, whether they have a name to do it in or not. History has been pretty clear on this.
 
#920
#920
rjd970 said:
This is just lazy philosophy. As bad as it could have been? Seriously? Heaven forbid 7 million Jews weren't killed. 6mm is fine, but we just can't have 7mm. And we should all be thanking him for "allowing" people do the right thing, and dismiss with the wave of a hand him "allowing" other people to kill 6mm of his people?

What even more interesting is everyone attributes the good intervening that happens to God, and dismisses the rest with recourse to free will and other convoluted explanations so their sacred beliefs in his love aren't tarnished.

What if God started with me? What is that supposed to mean? What if God didn't have a play in it at all, or never existed in the first place?
Click to expand...

Lazy? I'm not the one who will never address a criticism of my worldview. THat's you. What if God never existed at all? Fine, I've already addressed that in the previous post and you skipped over it. You can't even argue your own worldview because you know where it leads. Untenable, contradictory and self-defeating. You are content to attack our view and not even realize that you have to trespass on theistic ground to smuggle in any meaning when speaking of evil or justice. Have it your way. We are all just molecules in motion. Relgious people are just acting out of their genetic programming. And, you are just reacting out of yours. Unpurposed, undirected, processes resulted in you and me arguing over purpose. You win. You have no purpose. Congratulations. So, now that we've settled that.
-Who is responsible for the holocaust?
-Who is responsible for human suffering
-Injustice?


Yes, what if God started with you? It's a question. You demand a God who will relieve all suffering and ALL wrong doing, etc. So, I'm suggesting, great, what if he started with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#921
#921
GhostVol said:
1. Is N/A.... Those people don't tell you you're going to hell because you don't believe.

2. These people WILL tell you you're going to hell regardless of what kind of person you are because you don't believe. And they were the prevalent people of the church I attended until I saw the inherent injustice of it.

3. Those people that just blindly believe because they've been told to do so. I can't do that.

4. Those people who go to the sources they "trust" to have the beliefs reinforced and told they must simply have faith. The size of this group may be surprising to you, finding apostasy because they refuse to believe the answers answers they're given.
Click to expand...

Maybe if you get your eyes off people and keep them on Christ. It dosent matter what others say or do. I think a lot of people turn their backs on Christ by looking at socalled christains. You will not be judged on what others do. A lot of unbelivers denounce God because they got their eyes on christains that are living for the devil. It's all to do about you, not them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#922
#922
OJ said:
Maybe if you get your eyes off people and keep them on Christ. It dosent matter what others say or do. I think a lot of people turn their backs on Christ by looking at socalled christains. You will not be judged on what others do. A lot of unbelivers denounce God because they got their eyes on christains that are living for the devil. It's all to do about you, not them.
Click to expand...

I know a number of people who think as I do and not one would (with a straight face) state that your assertion is why they reject belief in gods.

Again and this seems to be the point you all keep missing - it's not just YOUR god that is rejected, it's all of them. The fact that "so called christians" are often hypocritical, while amusing, is irrelevant to an atheists non belief. To me, it's just a cherry on top.
 
#923
#923
Septic said:
I know a number of people who think as I do and not one would (with a straight face) state that your assertion is why they reject belief in gods.

Again and this seems to be the point you all keep missing - it's not just YOUR god that is rejected, it's all of them. The fact that "so called christians" are often hypocritical, while amusing, is irrelevant to an atheists non belief. To me, it's just a cherry on top.
Click to expand...

Personally, you lack of belief, and any reason associated with it, bothers me not in the least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top