A few questions for the fundies

[RWNJ]

It fascinates me that you spent so much time and effort claiming you have power and authority over someone you claim you don't believe in.

Because he was granting your points and showing that , even if your points are granted, what you are saying is STILL absurd. You should spend some time thinking about that instead of posting goofy things like what I just quoted.

No one has shown how and why a creator is accountable to his creation. Perhaps you could endeavor to do so?

God is not accountable to anyone. The only thing He is accountable for is His promise that He made to us.

 

[Taz]

"it is not Catholic teaching that God is a murdering rapist. " Sure it is, God drowned them all in a flood, it says so in CHAPTER ONE! And they teach that as well...

" All I am saying that understanding the author's original intent and the people the author was addressing adds to and broadens any perspective". So what was the reason to use a story about a murdering raping god?

I've already gone over this, but I will try again. The original author and his audience come from a perspective that a good, just, and loving God created a good world. They saw humans as making an evil mess of it all. Where was goodness? Where was justice? Where was love? Bible literalists see God as sending a flood and starting over.

I've read Jewish commentary that points out several things: First, the Bible states that after God separated land and water, the entire globe was never again covered with water. They see in the actual account that mountains could not be seen through the rain, but after the rain stopped, mountains could be seen again.

Another commentary is that God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Thus, either every natural disaster today is designed and sent by God to a precise place and purpose, or yesterday's Great Flood was also a natural disaster. What happens after natural disasters? People take stock of themselves and what they have been doing. The account of The Great Flood was written with this hindsight.

Next, what is your experience of God? Did God murder one of your family members? Did He rape another?

Look, you are asking me to sum up decades of study in an online post. How many decades of study did you undertake before reaching your conclusion? Or, did you read the story once, decide you had perfect understanding of what happened thousands of years ago, and jump to a conclusion to fit a personal agenda? That is okay. Some feel they need a good reason to turn from any childhood teaching. In that way I feel we may be quite similar. I chose one direction, you chose another.

Well, you got it wrong again. The authors wrote the bible from the perspective of a vengeful, murdering... god who threatened humans with fire in they didn’t obey it. Meaning it’s all about control, and how humans are going to scare people into doing what they want them to do. Like seriously, a god who drowns his creation so he can start over again and then STILL doesn’t get it right? It’s laughable.

 

[Taz]

I've already answered him, I laughed and told him that a murdering, raping god was not something that I could believe really exists, so POOF, he's gone. After this, there are no more repercussions from the god of the bible, because ultimately, it only exists if you let it exist and dominate you. And now it has no power over me.

You'll find out.

I think it's more like YOU'LL find out that it was all a myth. Anyways, we're all going to the same place when we die.

And anyways, if I get judged by god's standards, I'm good to go. We all are.

Keep believing that. It won't help, but I'm sure you'll be able to convince Him that you have authority to judge Him. Just keep denying that He exists.

I'm agnostic, I don't deny the possibility of a god, just simply see no real proof at this time, but am willing to change my mind given real proof either way. Which is another reason why I first came to this forum, looking for proof/answers. So far, a lot of talk, but no real proof yet. It appears that people's faith in god is based on nothing really. Which is also quite fascinating.

The problem here is that God will give evidence to those who genuinely look for Him and ask. BUT, that evidence is usually something that only that person can verify, thus leaving others who demand evidence wanting.

I often ask agnostics just what evidence they will accept. If God shows you Himself, but in a way that only you experience and that your fellow agnostics mock and impugn, what would you do?

Give me an example of god showing himself to me. It would depend, I guess.

 

[Meriweather]

Well, you got it wrong again. The authors wrote the bible from the perspective of a vengeful, murdering... god who threatened humans with fire in they didn’t obey it. Meaning it’s all about control, and how humans are going to scare people into doing what they want them to do. Like seriously, a god who drowns his creation so he can start over again and then STILL doesn’t get it right? It’s laughable.

Except...the story is more about mankind than it is about God. It's about how humans can't get it right.

 

[Taz]

You'll find out.

I think it's more like YOU'LL find out that it was all a myth. Anyways, we're all going to the same place when we die.

And anyways, if I get judged by god's standards, I'm good to go. We all are.

Keep believing that. It won't help, but I'm sure you'll be able to convince Him that you have authority to judge Him. Just keep denying that He exists.

I'm agnostic, I don't deny the possibility of a god, just simply see no real proof at this time, but am willing to change my mind given real proof either way. Which is another reason why I first came to this forum, looking for proof/answers. So far, a lot of talk, but no real proof yet. It appears that people's faith in god is based on nothing really. Which is also quite fascinating.

The problem here is that God will give evidence to those who genuinely look for Him and ask. BUT, that evidence is usually something that only that person can verify, thus leaving others who demand evidence wanting.

I often ask agnostics just what evidence they will accept. If God shows you Himself, but in a way that only you experience and that your fellow agnostics mock and impugn, what would you do?

There were those who actually witnessed the miracles of Christ and still rejected him. It's not that the evidence is lacking. It is simply the fact that some people cannot let go of their sinful pride and admit that they just aren't good enough. And that's why they'll go to Hell. The sin of pride. It was also the Devil's downfall, so he's in good company. No one will be able to stand before God and say that they didn't know. No one.

That’s some pretty heavily delusional stuff there, you read something in a book, and now I’m going to burn in Hell?

 

[Taz]

Well, you got it wrong again. The authors wrote the bible from the perspective of a vengeful, murdering... god who threatened humans with fire in they didn’t obey it. Meaning it’s all about control, and how humans are going to scare people into doing what they want them to do. Like seriously, a god who drowns his creation so he can start over again and then STILL doesn’t get it right? It’s laughable.

Except...the story is more about mankind than it is about God. It's about how humans can't get it right.

Can’t get what right? That we don’t measure up to the authors’ standards so we should listen to them more? Repent and be controlled.

 

[Meriweather]

Can’t get what right? That we don’t measure up to the authors’ standards so we should listen to them more? Repent and be controlled.

Can't get living up to our potential right. This usually happens we turn away from God and His ways (love, goodness, justice). God can help us become the best version of ourselves, if we seek this in our lives.

Who are you afraid might control you? (I learned early on no one could control me, so that I had better learn to control myself. Never had the fear of being controlled--outside the fact I refused to relinquish control. Some might call that an innate fear of being controlled.) As an adult, I expect my students to control themselves as me controlling me is a full-time job.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's about how humans can't get it right.

Hmmm.....sounds like a very serious design flaw....

 

[Meriweather]

Hmmm.....sounds like a very serious design flaw....

Or, perhaps it was intended that we take part in creating who we want to be?

 

[hadit]

You'll find out.

I think it's more like YOU'LL find out that it was all a myth. Anyways, we're all going to the same place when we die.

And anyways, if I get judged by god's standards, I'm good to go. We all are.

Keep believing that. It won't help, but I'm sure you'll be able to convince Him that you have authority to judge Him. Just keep denying that He exists.

I'm agnostic, I don't deny the possibility of a god, just simply see no real proof at this time, but am willing to change my mind given real proof either way. Which is another reason why I first came to this forum, looking for proof/answers. So far, a lot of talk, but no real proof yet. It appears that people's faith in god is based on nothing really. Which is also quite fascinating.

The problem here is that God will give evidence to those who genuinely look for Him and ask. BUT, that evidence is usually something that only that person can verify, thus leaving others who demand evidence wanting.

I often ask agnostics just what evidence they will accept. If God shows you Himself, but in a way that only you experience and that your fellow agnostics mock and impugn, what would you do?

Give me an example of god showing himself to me. It would depend, I guess.

What would be significant to you personally? For some people it might be a vision during which they were told things they couldn't have known any other way. For others it could be a message of hope at the exact moment they were ready to commit suicide. It may be hearing a sermon and feeling an overwhelming certainty that God not only exists, but is calling you to Himself. There are many ways God chooses to reveal Himself, and what is significant to one person may not be to another.

The point is, if you would be willing to accept evidence that only you experienced and only you could verify as true, why do you denigrate others who have been convinced of God's existence through their personal experience, just because you have not had their experiences?

 

[zaangalewa]

Meriweather: "it is not Catholic teaching that God is a murdering rapist. "

Sure it is ...

What for heavens sake is the sense of such a "communication"? The virtual world of the internet is not the place for a psychotherapy.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Hmmm.....sounds like a very serious design flaw....

Or, perhaps it was intended that we take part in creating who we want to be?

It does not then follow that we would be made to be so bad at it. You have quite a few blanks to fill in.

 

[Meriweather]

It does not then follow that we would be made to be so bad at it. You have quite a few blanks to fill in.

Not really. But first, how are you defining a "bad" choice. How do you come to that judgment?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It does not then follow that we would be made to be so bad at it. You have quite a few blanks to fill in.

Not really. But first, how are you defining a "bad" choice. How do you come to that judgment?

Excuse me, but you are the one who said we are making bad choices: "
. It's about how humans can't get it right."

So yes, "really", you still have a lot of explaining to do. Why would god prpgram us to get it so wrong? Serious design flaw.

If this all seems absurd....then you are perceptive and have basic brain function. It is absurd. And bizarre. A much simpler explanation is that it is utter nonsense.

 

[Taz]

Meriweather: "it is not Catholic teaching that God is a murdering rapist. "

Sure it is ...

What for heavens sake is the sense of such a "communication"? The virtual world of the internet is not the place for a psychotherapy.

The Catholic church teaches that god drowned nearly everyone... And that god impregnated a virgin against her will.

 

[Meriweather]

Excuse me, but you are the one who said we are making bad choices. Scroll up.

So yes, "really", you still have a lot of explaining to do.

Since you misunderstood, let me go back and connect the dots. I know how I am defining bad, and how I came to that judgement. I am asking you how you define bad and how you came to that judgment. (Before continuing the conversation I am trying determine our common ground--if any.)

Recall, I said people choose bad instead of good. What I got from you is that people are bad at making good choices. Hence my question: How are you defining bad (at making choices)? Are you saying people deliberately choose bad, and that's the design fall? Are you saying people mistake a bad choice from a good choice? Are you saying people don't know bad from good?

Hope this helps.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I am asking you how you define bad and how you came to that judgment.

Tough shit, we'll get to that later. I am pointimg out huge holes in your points, mainly that us being so bad at it (by ypur estimation) appears to be a serious design flaw. You then attempted to explain this away by saying that God wanted us to make our own choices, so gave us free will and the ability to go bad.

Yet that doesn't quite suffice as an explanation, because you still have not explained why we were designed to "not get it right". God could have designed us with free will which resulted in getting it "right" more of the time than we do. Why didnt he? Seems to be quite a design flaw. Unless it was intentional, which raises even more questions....like, why is god apparently a ******* asshole?

See, your ad hoc explanations raise more questions than they answer. You are not going to wriggle out by bailing out to a semantics argument.

 

[Meriweather]

Tough shit, we'll get to that later. I am pointimg out huge holes in your points, mainly that us being so bad at it (by ypur estimation) appears to be a serious design flaw. You then attenpted to explain this away by saying that God wanted us to make our own choices, so gave us free will and the ability to go bad.

Yet that doesnt quite sufgice as an explanation, because you still have not explained why we were designed to "not get it right". God could have designed us with free will which resulted in getting it "right" more of the time than we do. Why didnt he? Seems to be quite a design flaw. Unless it was intentional, which raises even more questions....like, why is god apparently a ******* asshole?

See, your ad hoc explanations raise more questions than they answer. You are not going to wriggle out by bailing out to a semantics argument.

Actually, you are missing the line of thought I am pursuing and changing it with a line of thought you are pursuing. I will honor your decision not to continue this discussion.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Tough shit, we'll get to that later. I am pointimg out huge holes in your points, mainly that us being so bad at it (by ypur estimation) appears to be a serious design flaw. You then attenpted to explain this away by saying that God wanted us to make our own choices, so gave us free will and the ability to go bad.

Yet that doesnt quite sufgice as an explanation, because you still have not explained why we were designed to "not get it right". God could have designed us with free will which resulted in getting it "right" more of the time than we do. Why didnt he? Seems to be quite a design flaw. Unless it was intentional, which raises even more questions....like, why is god apparently a ******* asshole?

See, your ad hoc explanations raise more questions than they answer. You are not going to wriggle out by bailing out to a semantics argument.

Actually, you are missing the line of thought I am pursuing and changing it with a line of thought you are pursuing. I will honor your decision not to continue this discussion.

This is just you , doing a little dance to avoid my questions. By your words, you say we cant get it right, and that god created ua to make our own choices. What an odd choice on god's part to create us to universally get it wrong, eh?

Yes, it's as absurd as it seems. You are holding an empty bag. You have no good reason or evidence to back up any of this dogma. It just is what it is.

 

[hadit]

Meriweather: "it is not Catholic teaching that God is a murdering rapist. "

Sure it is ...

What for heavens sake is the sense of such a "communication"? The virtual world of the internet is not the place for a psychotherapy.

The Catholic church teaches that god drowned nearly everyone... And that god impregnated a virgin against her will.

If you read the story, you'd see that Mary was honored to carry the Messiah.