| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Truth Hunter" |
| Date: |
28 Mar 2005 06:48:01 AM |
| Object: |
Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God =3D Atonement
God created A&E beings knowing from the start that they would not
please him. And when they would not please him, he knew he would have
to arrange to have the humans torture and kill him/God in the form of
Jesus so that he could forgive them for being the way he created them
to be and the way he knew they would be from the beginning. And he
knew, at the beginning, that if people did not accept that he would do
something so utterly ridiculous, he would have to cast them into hell
where they would weep and gnash their teeth in a lake of fire forever.
All this to please his own fragile ego, apparently.
This is the most ridiculous concept I have ever been asked to accept,
and I don't accept it. I cannot accept that an all knowing, all
perfect, all good God would be such a sadistic idiot. Apparently
Christians can.
God sacrificed himself to himself to satisfy his anger and human beings
for being exactly the way he created them to be and for being exactly
the way he knew they would be from the beginnning of time. And yet God
now threatens to torture people for eternity if they don't believe that
he is stupid enough to do something like this.
It constantly amazes me that Christians can pretend that this makes
some kind of sense.
http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/faq-tr.html
Bumper Sticker
DIVINE INSANITY
God killed himself on the cross to save his own creation fro=ADm his own
wrath ! (Author unknown)
.
|
|
| User: "Don - - - - - ---" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
30 Mar 2005 09:05:54 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:40:08 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 23:02:22 GMT, Don <- - - - - ---
somebody@worldwide.net> wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:25:34 GMT, Werner Kurator
<werner@peace-with.all> wrote:
Don
using this <8e3j41psv663fdq90jafc8b0hos7s5rapn@4ax.com> message-id
on 2005-03-29 announced the following statement:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:03:03 GMT, Werner Kurator
<werner@peace-with.all> wrote:
OK can we from any parts of the Bible deduce _WHAT_ God _wanted_ them to
do?
God knew that Adam had just two choices
to eat
not to eat
My question is:
_Which_ of the _two_ did God _prefer_?
Can we apply Deuteronomy 30,15 19 in this situation?
To me it's seem that the choices are the same. Now in verse 19 it says
*therefore choose life*
Was God's desire that Adam _choose_ life?
So do you want a real answer or do you want more evangelical cliches
and platitudes?
Of course a _real_ answer, if it's based on sound religious teaching....
Sure I'd like to know what would have happened if Adam hadn't eaten....
It's certainly something to consider.
Right up there with wondering what would have happened if Superman was
a Nazi.
Obviously, it is something that you have never pondered. You must
know everything. I have wondered what would have happened if Adam had
not eaten the fruit. Suppose Eve alone ate it? Suppose neither ate
the fruit?
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
30 Mar 2005 02:09:33 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:05:54 GMT, Don <- - - - - ---
somebody@worldwide.net> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:40:08 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 23:02:22 GMT, Don <- - - - - ---
somebody@worldwide.net> wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:25:34 GMT, Werner Kurator
<werner@peace-with.all> wrote:
Don
using this <8e3j41psv663fdq90jafc8b0hos7s5rapn@4ax.com> message-id
on 2005-03-29 announced the following statement:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:03:03 GMT, Werner Kurator
<werner@peace-with.all> wrote:
OK can we from any parts of the Bible deduce _WHAT_ God _wanted_ them to
do?
God knew that Adam had just two choices
to eat
not to eat
My question is:
_Which_ of the _two_ did God _prefer_?
Can we apply Deuteronomy 30,15 19 in this situation?
To me it's seem that the choices are the same. Now in verse 19 it says
*therefore choose life*
Was God's desire that Adam _choose_ life?
So do you want a real answer or do you want more evangelical cliches
and platitudes?
Of course a _real_ answer, if it's based on sound religious teaching....
Sure I'd like to know what would have happened if Adam hadn't eaten....
It's certainly something to consider.
Right up there with wondering what would have happened if Superman was
a Nazi.
Obviously, it is something that you have never pondered. You must
know everything. I have wondered what would have happened if Adam had
not eaten the fruit. Suppose Eve alone ate it? Suppose neither ate
the fruit?
You are talking about fiction. Nothing happened in the first place.
There is no Superman. There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don - - - - - ---" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
30 Mar 2005 05:42:10 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:09:33 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
And you are so sure of this because...?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
31 Mar 2005 01:31:52 PM |
|
|
Don wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:09:33 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
And you are so sure of this because...?
My point too. When one encounters a claim, a person can accept it as
true, reject it as false, or withhold judgment because he doesn't have
anything to go on. Typically atheists use the claim that "there's no
evidence", but that claim by itself at most supports withholding
judgment. Thomas P draws the "it's just fiction" conclusion but he
needs more than a lack of evidence to support such a conclusion.
Keith
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don - - - - - ---" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
31 Mar 2005 07:13:53 PM |
|
|
On 31 Mar 2005 11:31:52 -0800, wrote:
Don wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:09:33 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
And you are so sure of this because...?
My point too. When one encounters a claim, a person can accept it as
true, reject it as false, or withhold judgment because he doesn't have
anything to go on. Typically atheists use the claim that "there's no
evidence", but that claim by itself at most supports withholding
judgment. Thomas P draws the "it's just fiction" conclusion but he
needs more than a lack of evidence to support such a conclusion.
Keith
That's why I always say agnostics are more honest than atheists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
31 Mar 2005 09:01:15 PM |
|
|
Don wrote:
On 31 Mar 2005 11:31:52 -0800, wrote:
Don wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:09:33 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
And you are so sure of this because...?
My point too. When one encounters a claim, a person can accept it as
true, reject it as false, or withhold judgment because he doesn't
have
anything to go on. Typically atheists use the claim that "there's no
evidence", but that claim by itself at most supports withholding
judgment. Thomas P draws the "it's just fiction" conclusion but he
needs more than a lack of evidence to support such a conclusion.
Keith
That's why I always say agnostics are more honest than atheists.
maybe so, but when I was an atheist I really did believe that theism
was a fiction. It would have been dishonest for me to act as if I din't
hold that strong belief.
Keith
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
31 Mar 2005 08:04:45 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 01:13:53 GMT, Don <- - - - - ---
somebody@worldwide.net> wrote:
On 31 Mar 2005 11:31:52 -0800, wrote:
Don wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:09:33 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
And you are so sure of this because...?
My point too. When one encounters a claim, a person can accept it as
true, reject it as false, or withhold judgment because he doesn't have
anything to go on. Typically atheists use the claim that "there's no
evidence", but that claim by itself at most supports withholding
judgment. Thomas P draws the "it's just fiction" conclusion but he
needs more than a lack of evidence to support such a conclusion.
Keith
That's why I always say agnostics are more honest than atheists.
Because both you and Keith are too stupid and rude to grant that
atheists and atheism aren't what you imagine, so you attack a bigoted
stereotype.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
31 Mar 2005 08:59:41 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 01:13:53 GMT, Don <- - - - - ---
somebody@worldwide.net> wrote:
On 31 Mar 2005 11:31:52 -0800, wrote:
Don wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:09:33 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
And you are so sure of this because...?
My point too. When one encounters a claim, a person can accept it
as
true, reject it as false, or withhold judgment because he doesn't
have
anything to go on. Typically atheists use the claim that "there's
no
evidence", but that claim by itself at most supports withholding
judgment. Thomas P draws the "it's just fiction" conclusion but he
needs more than a lack of evidence to support such a conclusion.
Keith
That's why I always say agnostics are more honest than atheists.
Because both you and Keith are too stupid and rude to grant that
atheists and atheism aren't what you imagine, so you attack a
bigoted
stereotype.
I am not interested in arguing with you about how the word 'atheist'
ought to be construed. But Thomas P made a claim that something was in
fact false; it takes more than mere lack of evidence to support a
conclusion that something is in fact false. That has nothing to do with
what atheists in general say.
Keith
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
31 Mar 2005 12:47:08 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:42:10 GMT, Don <- - - - - ---
somebody@worldwide.net> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:09:33 +0200, thomas p
<tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
And you are so sure of this because...?
Here is my complete post:
You are talking about fiction. Nothing happened in the first place.
There is no Superman. There were no such persons as Adam and Eve.
I am sure for the same reason that I am sure there is no Superman.
Both stories are very obviously fiction.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "wcb" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
29 Mar 2005 06:55:29 PM |
|
|
Werner Kurator wrote:
Genesis 3:22. Had Adam been smarter and instead of hiding
went boldly up to the tree of life and grab a fruit from that,
we'd be gods now.
Genesis 3:22
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good
and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of
life, and eat, and live for ever:
REALLY! DO ANY OF YOU GOOBERS EVER ACTUALLY READ THAT DAMNED
BIBLE!?
God threw him out of the garden to keep him
from living forever.
God created Adam stupid and mortal as mere stoop labor.
Genesis 2:17. The first thing he did with Adam is lie
to him.
--
When I shake my killfile, I can hear them buzzing!
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werner Kurator" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
30 Mar 2005 02:00:16 AM |
|
|
wcb using this <114ju2un0tj9v20@corp.supernews.com> message-id
on 2005-03-30 announced the following statement:
Werner Kurator wrote:
Genesis 3:22. Had Adam been smarter and instead of hiding
went boldly up to the tree of life and grab a fruit from that,
we'd be gods now.
Genesis 3:22
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good
and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of
life, and eat, and live for ever:
REALLY! DO ANY OF YOU GOOBERS EVER ACTUALLY READ THAT DAMNED
BIBLE!?
God threw him out of the garden to keep him
from living forever.
God created Adam stupid and mortal as mere stoop labor.
Genesis 2:17. The first thing he did with Adam is lie
to him.
That still doesn't answer my question if God preferred Adam _not_ to eat.
As for me I don't take that passage _literally_.
It raises too many questions that it answers..
HTH
Werner Kurator
A random Sig-generator spewed this one out...
--
"I didn't realize I was going to create a culture icon when I did it.
But I have to share the credit. I may have invented it, but I think Bill made
it famous."
-- Dave Bradley (talking about inventing CRTL-ALT-DELETE)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
31 Mar 2005 01:26:07 PM |
|
|
wcb wrote:
Werner Kurator wrote:
Genesis 3:22. Had Adam been smarter and instead of hiding
went boldly up to the tree of life and grab a fruit from that,
we'd be gods now.
Genesis 3:22
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to
know good
and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the
tree of
life, and eat, and live for ever:
It doesn't say they'd *be* godst. It says that A & E would live
forever, but it doesn't say they would be gods. And it doesn't say what
there *quality* of life would be.
REALLY! DO ANY OF YOU GOOBERS EVER ACTUALLY READ THAT DAMNED
BIBLE!?
God threw him out of the garden to keep him
from living forever.
God created Adam stupid and mortal as mere stoop labor.
Genesis 2:17. The first thing he did with Adam is lie
to him.
In the story Adam didn't have to work at all until he sinned and was
tossed out of the garden. Where was the lie?
Keith
--
When I shake my killfile, I can hear them buzzing!
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
29 Mar 2005 08:05:25 PM |
|
|
Werner Kurator wrote:
keithj43@yahoo.com
using this <1112027174.130886.305830@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
message-id
on 2005-03-28 announced the following statement:
Hi Truth Hunter
Your characterization of Christian belief is a bit of a distortion
as
it contains some hidden assumptions that are not part of Christian
belief and ignores things that are part of Christian belief. My
comments appear below:
Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement
God created A&E beings knowing from the start that they would not
please him. And when they would not please him, he knew he would
have
to arrange to have the humans torture and kill him/God in the form
of
Jesus so that he could forgive them for being the way he created
them
to be and the way he knew they would be from the beginning...
This presupposed that Adam and Eve were *programmed* to do what
they
did; that's not what Christians say at all. Christians do generally
believe that God knew what we would freely do before we he decided
to
create us, but not that we were programmed to do so. Being free
creatures, how we respond to what we encounter is up to us.
OK can we from any parts of the Bible deduce _WHAT_ God _wanted_ them
to
do?
God knew that Adam had just two choices
to eat
not to eat
My question is:
_Which_ of the _two_ did God _prefer_?
Can we apply Deuteronomy 30,15 19 in this situation?
To me it's seem that the choices are the same. Now in verse 19 it
says
*therefore choose life*
Was God's desire that Adam _choose_ life?
IMO the Adam/Eve story is mythological. But I would agree that God's
preference is that we choose life. I think this is supported by the
passage you cite. It also can be derived from the following argument:
1. The bible says God is a loving God.
2. A loving God would prefer that we choose life.
3. Therefore the Biblical God does prefer that we choose life.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werner Kurator" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
30 Mar 2005 02:15:36 AM |
|
|
using this <1112148325.691641.320590@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
message-id on 2005-03-30 announced the following statement:
Werner Kurator wrote:
using this <1112027174.130886.305830@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
message-id
on 2005-03-28 announced the following statement:
Hi Truth Hunter
Your characterization of Christian belief is a bit of a distortion
as
it contains some hidden assumptions that are not part of Christian
belief and ignores things that are part of Christian belief. My
comments appear below:
Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement
God created A&E beings knowing from the start that they would not
please him. And when they would not please him, he knew he would
have
to arrange to have the humans torture and kill him/God in the form
of
Jesus so that he could forgive them for being the way he created
them
to be and the way he knew they would be from the beginning...
This presupposed that Adam and Eve were *programmed* to do what
they
did; that's not what Christians say at all. Christians do generally
believe that God knew what we would freely do before we he decided
to
create us, but not that we were programmed to do so. Being free
creatures, how we respond to what we encounter is up to us.
OK can we from any parts of the Bible deduce _WHAT_ God _wanted_ them
to
do?
God knew that Adam had just two choices
to eat
not to eat
My question is:
_Which_ of the _two_ did God _prefer_?
Can we apply Deuteronomy 30,15 19 in this situation?
To me it's seem that the choices are the same. Now in verse 19 it
says
*therefore choose life*
Was God's desire that Adam _choose_ life?
IMO the Adam/Eve story is mythological. But I would agree that God's
preference is that we choose life. I think this is supported by the
passage you cite. It also can be derived from the following argument:
1. The bible says God is a loving God.
2. A loving God would prefer that we choose life.
3. Therefore the Biblical God does prefer that we choose life.
Yes I think this story is shrouded in mystery.
I can't think that Adam and Eve were that _hungry_ that they would take
something that could kill them. (of course they maybe didn't know what
_death_ means.
Why would God give a commandment to them they didn't understand...
Unfortunately little is written about what could be if Adam and Eve
hadn't eaten....
Billy Graham in his "peace with God:" ( page 24) Adam and Eve
were supposed to become through divine grace the royal couple on
earth. And then: There would no need to send Jesus to the earth.
Interesting thought...
Werner Kurator
A random Sig-generator spewed this one out...
--
BorgAlpha: btw, a lame ***** is a serious medical issue, you should get that
looked at, as soon as you're done arsing around at whatever you're trying to
do -- Flimflam on #linux on IRC 2003/06/27
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
30 Mar 2005 10:01:35 AM |
|
|
Werner Kurator wrote:
keithj43@yahoo.com
using this <1112148325.691641.320590@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
message-id on 2005-03-30 announced the following statement:
Werner Kurator wrote:
keithj43@yahoo.com
using this <1112027174.130886.305830@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
message-id
(snip)
IMO the Adam/Eve story is mythological. But I would agree that
God's
preference is that we choose life. I think this is supported by the
passage you cite. It also can be derived from the following
argument:
1. The bible says God is a loving God.
2. A loving God would prefer that we choose life.
3. Therefore the Biblical God does prefer that we choose life.
Yes I think this story is shrouded in mystery.
I can't think that Adam and Eve were that _hungry_ that they would
take
something that could kill them. (of course they maybe didn't know
what
_death_ means.
In the story the reason they ate of the fruit is that the were tempted
by Satan's claim that God was lying, that the fruit would really make
them as wise as God.
Why would God give a commandment to them they didn't understand...
I would say they did understand the command: they knew they were
commanded not to eat the fruit.
Unfortunately little is written about what could be if Adam and Eve
hadn't eaten....
IMO this is like how little is written about what would happen if
Hansel and Gretel had not gone into the dangerous woods. Being a myth,
the characters do what is needed to make the point of the myth.
Keith
Billy Graham in his "peace with God:" ( page 24) Adam and Eve
were supposed to become through divine grace the royal couple on
earth. And then: There would no need to send Jesus to the earth.
Interesting thought...
Werner Kurator
A random Sig-generator spewed this one out...
--
BorgAlpha: btw, a lame ***** is a serious medical issue, you should
get that
looked at, as soon as you're done arsing around at whatever you're
trying to
do -- Flimflam on #linux on IRC 2003/06/27
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
28 Mar 2005 11:30:02 PM |
|
|
On 28 Mar 2005 08:26:14 -0800, wrote:
Hi Truth Hunter
Your characterization of Christian belief is a bit of a distortion as
it contains some hidden assumptions that are not part of Christian
belief and ignores things that are part of Christian belief. My
comments appear below:
Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement
God created A&E beings knowing from the start that they would not
please him. And when they would not please him, he knew he would have
to arrange to have the humans torture and kill him/God in the form of
Jesus so that he could forgive them for being the way he created them
to be and the way he knew they would be from the beginning...
This presupposed that Adam and Eve were *programmed* to do what they
did; that's not what Christians say at all.
They do, however, say that god is omniscient and omnipotent. There is
nothing inaccurate in what was said.
Christians do generally
believe that God knew what we would freely do before we he decided to
create us, but not that we were programmed to do so.
Yes, they are inconsistent.
Being free
creatures, how we respond to what we encounter is up to us.
And god knew what we would do, and he freely chose to create those
that he knew he would send to hell.
The only
non-contradictory way God could prevent us from doing what we would
otherwise freely choose to do would be not to create us free wrt that
potential action.
Within the Christian belief system there could not possibly be
anything "potential" about it; it would be an absolute certainty known
by god ahead of time, and there would be nothing stopping god from
creating people who would freely choose good.
Now you may try to argue against the Christian view
of freedom, but the philosophical issues surrounding freedom are
difficult and do not fit your caricature of Christianity being idiotic.
There was no cariactaure. It was completely accurate.
And he
knew, at the beginning, that if people did not accept that he would
do
something so utterly ridiculous, he would have to cast them into hell
where they would weep and gnash their teeth in a lake of fire
forever.
All this to please his own fragile ego, apparently.
IMO that's like blaming emphasema on the fragile ego of Non Smoking
just because those who refuse to quit smoking run a serious risk of it.
If a person refuses to accept the one thing that will cure his disease
then what happens happens.
No, it is nothing like that at all. It is always strange to see
Christians insisting that their god is omnipotent then making up
analogies that ignore that omnipotence.
This is the most ridiculous concept I have ever been asked to accept,
and I don't accept it. I cannot accept that an all knowing, all
perfect, all good God would be such a sadistic idiot. Apparently
Christians can.
We do not accept that God is sadistic nor an idiot. We don't agree with
your characterization of Christian belief.
He did not say that Christians believe god is sadistic only that the
behavior described is sadistic or evil, and it clearly is.
snip
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
29 Mar 2005 10:11:43 AM |
|
|
thomas p wrote:
On 28 Mar 2005 08:26:14 -0800, wrote:
Hi Truth Hunter
Your characterization of Christian belief is a bit of a distortion
as
it contains some hidden assumptions that are not part of Christian
belief and ignores things that are part of Christian belief. My
comments appear below:
Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement
God created A&E beings knowing from the start that they would not
please him. And when they would not please him, he knew he would
have
to arrange to have the humans torture and kill him/God in the form
of
Jesus so that he could forgive them for being the way he created
them
to be and the way he knew they would be from the beginning...
This presupposed that Adam and Eve were *programmed* to do what they
did; that's not what Christians say at all.
They do, however, say that god is omniscient and omnipotent. There
is
nothing inaccurate in what was said.
I don't agree. He characterized the Christian belief as God punishing
people for being the way he made them to be. That implies he could have
"programmed" them differently and that's not a part of the Christian
claim.
Christians do generally
believe that God knew what we would freely do before we he decided
to
create us, but not that we were programmed to do so.
Yes, they are inconsistent.
YOu claim that it is inconsistent to say that we are free and yet God
knew in advance what we would do. That is a very debatable
philosophical point and there are intelligent people on both sides of
the debate. Truth Seekers condemnation of Christian "stupidity" fails
to give proper consideration of the issue. T
Being free
creatures, how we respond to what we encounter is up to us.
And god knew what we would do, and he freely chose to create those
that he knew he would send to hell.
I agree that God could have decided to create or not create whoever he
wanted, and that if he doesn't create a person the person will
(obviously) not experience the consequences of his (non-existent)
decisions.
The only
non-contradictory way God could prevent us from doing what we would
otherwise freely choose to do would be not to create us free wrt
that
potential action.
Within the Christian belief system there could not possibly be
anything "potential" about it; it would be an absolute certainty
known
by god ahead of time, and there would be nothing stopping god from
creating people who would freely choose good.
The "potential" part comes from the fact that if a person was never
created he couldn't take the action.
Now you may try to argue against the Christian view
of freedom, but the philosophical issues surrounding freedom are
difficult and do not fit your caricature of Christianity being
idiotic.
There was no cariactaure. It was completely accurate.
Clearly it was a caricature since the specific things he called
Christian beliefs (that we behave the way God made us to but we are
punished for those actions) isn't part of Christianity. Since Christian
claims are consistent with the view of freedom embraced by most
Christians, and since that view of freedom *doesn't* have God punishing
people for what God made them do, his claim was inaccurate.
And he
knew, at the beginning, that if people did not accept that he
would
do
something so utterly ridiculous, he would have to cast them into
hell
where they would weep and gnash their teeth in a lake of fire
forever.
All this to please his own fragile ego, apparently.
IMO that's like blaming emphasema on the fragile ego of Non Smoking
just because those who refuse to quit smoking run a serious risk of
it.
If a person refuses to accept the one thing that will cure his
disease
then what happens happens.
No, it is nothing like that at all. It is always strange to see
Christians insisting that their god is omnipotent then making up
analogies that ignore that omnipotence.
IT is no part of omnipotence that an omnipotent being be able to do the
logically contradictory and it is logically contradictory to suggest
that an omnipotent being cause X to happen without the conditions
necessary for X's occurance.
This is the most ridiculous concept I have ever been asked to
accept,
and I don't accept it. I cannot accept that an all knowing, all
perfect, all good God would be such a sadistic idiot. Apparently
Christians can.
We do not accept that God is sadistic nor an idiot. We don't agree
with
your characterization of Christian belief.
He did not say that Christians believe god is sadistic only that the
behavior described is sadistic or evil, and it clearly is.
His description didn't match the Christian description; it included
things that are no part of Christianity, that are not even implied by
Christianity.
Keith
snip
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
29 Mar 2005 12:37:36 PM |
|
|
On 29 Mar 2005 08:11:43 -0800, wrote:
thomas p wrote:
On 28 Mar 2005 08:26:14 -0800, wrote:
Hi Truth Hunter
Your characterization of Christian belief is a bit of a distortion
as
it contains some hidden assumptions that are not part of Christian
belief and ignores things that are part of Christian belief. My
comments appear below:
Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement
God created A&E beings knowing from the start that they would not
please him. And when they would not please him, he knew he would
have
to arrange to have the humans torture and kill him/God in the form
of
Jesus so that he could forgive them for being the way he created
them
to be and the way he knew they would be from the beginning...
This presupposed that Adam and Eve were *programmed* to do what they
did; that's not what Christians say at all.
They do, however, say that god is omniscient and omnipotent. There
is
nothing inaccurate in what was said.
I don't agree. He characterized the Christian belief as God punishing
people for being the way he made them to be.
No he didn't. He pointed out, assuming that god existed, that that is
what that god is doing.
That implies he could have
"programmed" them differently and that's not a part of the Christian
claim.
He didn't say it was. The god described is, however, omnipotent.
Christians do generally
believe that God knew what we would freely do before we he decided
to
create us, but not that we were programmed to do so.
Yes, they are inconsistent.
YOu claim that it is inconsistent to say that we are free and yet God
knew in advance what we would do. That is a very debatable
philosophical point and there are intelligent people on both sides of
the debate. Truth Seekers condemnation of Christian "stupidity" fails
to give proper consideration of the issue. T
The issue is that an omniscient, omnipotent god is described. Clearly
that god would be capable of not creating people he knew would go to
hell. Clearly he would be capable of creating people (assuming the
validity of free will for the sake of discussion) who would always and
freely choose good.
Being free
creatures, how we respond to what we encounter is up to us.
And god knew what we would do, and he freely chose to create those
that he knew he would send to hell.
I agree that God could have decided to create or not create whoever he
wanted, and that if he doesn't create a person the person will
(obviously) not experience the consequences of his (non-existent)
decisions.
Good, you concede the entire point - unless, of course, you contend
that he would be incapable of creating people who would always and
freely choose good.
The only
non-contradictory way God could prevent us from doing what we would
otherwise freely choose to do would be not to create us free wrt
that
potential action.
Within the Christian belief system there could not possibly be
anything "potential" about it; it would be an absolute certainty
known
by god ahead of time, and there would be nothing stopping god from
creating people who would freely choose good.
The "potential" part comes from the fact that if a person was never
created he couldn't take the action.
I am glad you agree that once a person is created there is nothing
potential about what he might or might not do during his life.
Now you may try to argue against the Christian view
of freedom, but the philosophical issues surrounding freedom are
difficult and do not fit your caricature of Christianity being
idiotic.
There was no cariactaure. It was completely accurate.
Clearly it was a caricature since the specific things he called
Christian beliefs (that we behave the way God made us to but we are
punished for those actions) isn't part of Christianity.
Christians believe in a god that is omnipotent and who is soverign.
Everything else follows from that. The description was accurate.
Since Christian
claims are consistent with the view of freedom embraced by most
Christians, and since that view of freedom *doesn't* have God punishing
people for what God made them do, his claim was inaccurate.
What Christians believe about free will is immaterial. They believe
that god is omniscient and omnipotent. They believe god created them.
They believe some people will go to hell. They are merely unwilling
to accept the consequences of those beliefs, i.e. their god is evil.
And he
knew, at the beginning, that if people did not accept that he
would
do
something so utterly ridiculous, he would have to cast them into
hell
where they would weep and gnash their teeth in a lake of fire
forever.
All this to please his own fragile ego, apparently.
IMO that's like blaming emphasema on the fragile ego of Non Smoking
just because those who refuse to quit smoking run a serious risk of
it.
If a person refuses to accept the one thing that will cure his
disease
then what happens happens.
No, it is nothing like that at all. It is always strange to see
Christians insisting that their god is omnipotent then making up
analogies that ignore that omnipotence.
IT is no part of omnipotence that an omnipotent being be able to do the
logically contradictory and it is logically contradictory to suggest
that an omnipotent being cause X to happen without the conditions
necessary for X's occurance.
There is nothing contradictory is pointing out that a soverign god
does not have to create people he knows are going to hell or that he
would be capable of creating people who would always and freely choose
to do good.
This is the most ridiculous concept I have ever been asked to
accept,
and I don't accept it. I cannot accept that an all knowing, all
perfect, all good God would be such a sadistic idiot. Apparently
Christians can.
We do not accept that God is sadistic nor an idiot. We don't agree
with
your characterization of Christian belief.
He did not say that Christians believe god is sadistic only that the
behavior described is sadistic or evil, and it clearly is.
His description didn't match the Christian description; it included
things that are no part of Christianity, that are not even implied by
Christianity.
They are indeed not only implied but necessarily follow from the
beliefs that god is omnipotent and omniscient.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
29 Mar 2005 08:35:08 PM |
|
|
thomas p wrote:
On 29 Mar 2005 08:11:43 -0800, wrote:
thomas p wrote:
(snip)
This presupposed that Adam and Eve were *programmed* to do what
they
did; that's not what Christians say at all.
They do, however, say that god is omniscient and omnipotent.
There
is
nothing inaccurate in what was said.
I don't agree. He characterized the Christian belief as God
punishing
people for being the way he made them to be.
No he didn't. He pointed out, assuming that god existed, that that
is
what that god is doing.
Not so as I point out below:
That implies he could have
"programmed" them differently and that's not a part of the Christian
claim.
He didn't say it was. The god described is, however, omnipotent.
yes, but that doesn't imply that the way people behave is the "way God
*made* them to be", since that carries the implication of their being
"programmed" to behave that way.
Christians do generally
believe that God knew what we would freely do before we he
decided
to
create us, but not that we were programmed to do so.
Yes, they are inconsistent.
YOu claim that it is inconsistent to say that we are free and yet
God
knew in advance what we would do. That is a very debatable
philosophical point and there are intelligent people on both sides
of
the debate. Truth Seekers condemnation of Christian "stupidity"
fails
to give proper consideration of the issue. T
The issue is that an omniscient, omnipotent god is described.
Clearly
that god would be capable of not creating people he knew would go to
hell.
No doubt. But if he creates a free creature it is a contradiction to
suggest that he cause that free creature to do differently from what
the creature freely chooses to do. Is the idea of everlasting hell
*your* big issue here? Is that the issue you think Truth Seeker
considers the big issue? Truth Seeker seemed to think that it was
unjust to punish someone for bad behavior if God knew in advance that
the person would behvae badly. I don't see why God's *knowledge* has
any bearing on whether or not punishment is justified.
Clearly he would be capable of creating people (assuming the
validity of free will for the sake of discussion) who would always
and
freely choose good.
If a set of creatures is free there is no guarantee that they will all
choose to only do good, so why think the option you suggest is even
possible? And since that set of people wouldn't include you (it
wouldn't include me either) then why should I think it would be a
better option than the set that *does* include you?
Being free
creatures, how we respond to what we encounter is up to us.
And god knew what we would do, and he freely chose to create those
that he knew he would send to hell.
I agree that God could have decided to create or not create whoever
he
wanted, and that if he doesn't create a person the person will
(obviously) not experience the consequences of his (non-existent)
decisions.
Good, you concede the entire point - unless, of course, you contend
that he would be incapable of creating people who would always and
freely choose good.
I don't see how I conceded the point, since I have not conceded that
there is any other set of free creatures would produce a better result
than the actual set.
The only
non-contradictory way God could prevent us from doing what we
would
otherwise freely choose to do would be not to create us free wrt
that
potential action.
Within the Christian belief system there could not possibly be
anything "potential" about it; it would be an absolute certainty
known
by god ahead of time, and there would be nothing stopping god from
creating people who would freely choose good.
The "potential" part comes from the fact that if a person was never
created he couldn't take the action.
I am glad you agree that once a person is created there is nothing
potential about what he might or might not do during his life.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. I would say that since we have the
*power* to do only good then our doing only good *is* a potential
action, but the fact is we will *not* only do good.
Now you may try to argue against the Christian view
of freedom, but the philosophical issues surrounding freedom are
difficult and do not fit your caricature of Christianity being
idiotic.
There was no cariactaure. It was completely accurate.
Clearly it was a caricature since the specific things he called
Christian beliefs (that we behave the way God made us to but we are
punished for those actions) isn't part of Christianity.
Christians believe in a god that is omnipotent and who is soverign.
Everything else follows from that. The description was accurate.
I don't agree that the conclusions you suggest follow from omnipotence
and soverignity. Moreover it isn't *obvious* that they follow since the
conclusions depend on a debatable view of freedom, one that intelligent
people can disagree about.
Since Christian
claims are consistent with the view of freedom embraced by most
Christians, and since that view of freedom *doesn't* have God
punishing
people for what God made them do, his claim was inaccurate.
What Christians believe about free will is immaterial. They believe
that god is omniscient and omnipotent. They believe god created
them.
They believe some people will go to hell. They are merely unwilling
to accept the consequences of those beliefs, i.e. their god is evil.
I think you are missing the point. The point is that the Christian view
of freedom isn't obviously wrong, it is debatable, and the conclusions
you draw depend on the Christian view of freedom being false. Yuor
conclusions are thus debatable.
(snip)
IMO that's like blaming emphasema on the fragile ego of Non
Smoking
just because those who refuse to quit smoking run a serious risk
of
it.
If a person refuses to accept the one thing that will cure his
disease
then what happens happens.
No, it is nothing like that at all. It is always strange to see
Christians insisting that their god is omnipotent then making up
analogies that ignore that omnipotence.
IT is no part of omnipotence that an omnipotent being be able to do
the
logically contradictory and it is logically contradictory to suggest
that an omnipotent being cause X to happen without the conditions
necessary for X's occurance.
There is nothing contradictory is pointing out that a soverign god
does not have to create people he knows are going to hell or that he
would be capable of creating people who would always and freely
choose
to do good.
The last statement is very debatable, and it's also debatable whether
or not it wold have been better had God not created sinners like you (I
am also a sinner I need to repeat).
About the "hell" statement. It is indeed teh case that the most common
version of Christianity includes everlasting damnation. Are you making
an argument against the idea that everlasting damnation can be
justified? It's not nearly as easy an issue as you seem to think IMO.
keith
Keith
This is the most ridiculous concept I have ever been asked to
accept,
and I don't accept it. I cannot accept that an all knowing, all
perfect, all good God would be such a sadistic idiot.
Apparently
Christians can.
We do not accept that God is sadistic nor an idiot. We don't
agree
with
your characterization of Christian belief.
He did not say that Christians believe god is sadistic only that
the
behavior described is sadistic or evil, and it clearly is.
His description didn't match the Christian description; it included
things that are no part of Christianity, that are not even implied
by
Christianity.
They are indeed not only implied but necessarily follow from the
beliefs that god is omnipotent and omniscient.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don - - - - - ---" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
28 Mar 2005 12:44:39 PM |
|
|
On 28 Mar 2005 04:48:01 -0800, "Truth Hunter"
<hunter1234222@yahoo.com> wrote:
Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement
God created A&E beings knowing from the start that they would not
please him. And when they would not please him, he knew he would have
to arrange to have the humans torture and kill him/God in the form of
Jesus so that he could forgive them for being the way he created them
to be and the way he knew they would be from the beginning.
Good luck trying to get more than platitudes from this group if you
need an answer to that situation.
And he
knew, at the beginning, that if people did not accept that he would do
something so utterly ridiculous, he would have to cast them into hell
where they would weep and gnash their teeth in a lake of fire forever.
All this to please his own fragile ego, apparently.
Seems like a bizarre since of humor, doesn't it?
God sacrificed himself to himself to satisfy his anger and human beings
for being exactly the way he created them to be and for being exactly
the way he knew they would be from the beginnning of time. And yet God
now threatens to torture people for eternity if they don't believe that
he is stupid enough to do something like this.
Hmmm...I have never heard a preacher preach this anywhere...but I
would like for one to take the challenge.
It constantly amazes me that Christians can pretend that this makes
some kind of sense.
It's like...when God "calls" a pastor to a church. The pastor
immediately begins to lay-out his ego-driven plans and force them on
the congregation by saying things like, "God is leading us to do this"
and "We don't want to limit God."
Most of the time, the truth is that they are climbing the corporate
ladder.
Winning an argument on the Internet is like winning the gold medal at the Special Olympics.
Even though you're the champ, you're still a retard.
---Buck
.
|
|
|
| User: "dougwa" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
28 Mar 2005 01:32:42 PM |
|
|
Go to worldnet daily .com and search their archives for an article
entitled
"The Passion of the Christian" for an answer.
But you wont because you dont really want an answer.
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Adam/ Eve's sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement |
29 Mar 2005 11:37:42 AM |
|
|
On 28 Mar 2005 11:32:42 -0800, "dougwa" <tedw2@earthlink.net> wrote:
Go to worldnet daily .com and search their archives for an article
entitled
"The Passion of the Christian" for an answer.
But you wont because you dont really want an answer.
Another idiot who thinks he can read minds.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
