| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Ordog" |
| Date: |
13 Aug 2005 04:22:38 AM |
| Object: |
Re: THE HIGH UNINTELLIGENCE OF ATHEISM |
I don't believe in atheists wrote:
THE HIGH UNINTELLIGENCE OF ATHEISM
GOOD MORNING CLASS: At this moment, I would like to have you to visit
alt.atheism. As you know, each time I have had you visit this news group, it
was for the purpose of conducting an experiment to prove a point about
atheism. In every case, the truth and point I wanted to make were proved
overwhelmingly by the responses everyone of the atheists gave.
One experiment was designed to prove that atheism is not about proof but is
about rejecting certain fundamental truths. I asked the atheists who believe
in abortion to *prove* that human embryos and fetuses aren't human. Over the
course of a weeks time, you observed some of the most ridiculous and insane
responses. Not even the most so-called "educated" respondents provided the
least proof.
Another experiment was designed to prove that the most educated atheists
aren't really intelligent. In order to prove that truth, I asked only the
most educated atheists to respond to my post. All I simply asked the
atheists to do was to prove that there is nothing that is eternal. However,
the responses you observed were the most unintellectual you have ever read.
They ranged from cursing, name calling, cynicism, mockery, the posting of
pictures to ridicule and etc. There was not one intelligent response from
any of the respondents.
Now if you will, look at alt. atheism at this moment. Note the many
unintelligent subjects in the headers of each post. Try also reading the
content of the various posts. All of them manifest the deepest of
unintelligence. Most are pure senselessness and vanity. All basically
manifest a hatred for God and true Christianity and etc. If God's existence
is no more than the tooth fairy's or santa clause's, why do atheists put so
much time, effort and money into trying to disprove God's existence? None of
them are doing the same for the tooth fairy.
The web sites that atheists have placed on the internet also manifest the
unintelligence of atheism. Note all the unintelligent names of the sites.
Note also the unintelligent content of those sites.
When anyone note the content of atheistic news groups, atheistic web sites
and all other atheistic material on the web and in the world, no person in
his/her right mind can conclude that atheists are truly intelligent people.
The only way anyone can conclude that atheists are intelligent people is to
use the twisted and unintelligent logic of atheism.
(Lee)
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy
bringeth men's minds about to religion.
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy
bringeth men's minds about to religion.
Thank you for posting the results of your in depth scientific study on
the intellectual abilities of the atheist coomunity to sci.sceptics.
We are now all impressed by the innovative methodology used to
establish and demonstrate the mean intelligence quotients typical to
the non-religious subgroup of the human species. Sadly you did not
indicate the method of statistical analysis used in the validation of
the results of your experiments. Luckily your deep religious intuition
firmly placed you on a path of thought, which cut through the drab
necessity of scientific precison and reasoning. Your summary of results
clearly demonstrate the significance of your conclusions.
It is amazing how an superb mind is able to grasp such an important
idea of immense importance to all humanity, then create a conlusion
which makes the experiment a completely unnecessary formality. You are
a true genius!
At your earliest convenience, please let us have a copy of your
experiment protocol. We are in the planning phase of an experiment of
our own for which we would be honoured to use this brilliant new
technique of yours. We will of course include your name as co-author on
our paper that will be submitted to the Nobel Laureate Committee for
evaluation!
Oh, almost fogot! The title of our work will be: " A comprehensive
study of the fundamentalist Christian psyche under atheistic duress on
the basis of statistical eveluation of irrelevant troll posts to
atheist new groups on Usenet."
Yours truly
Ordog
"Beware of the man whose God is in the skies." Bernard Shaw
.
|
|
| User: "I dont believe in atheists" |
|
| Title: Re: THE HIGH UNINTELLIGENCE OF ATHEISM |
14 Aug 2005 12:15:23 AM |
|
|
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy
bringeth men's minds about to religion.
"Ordog" <odbok001@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:1123924958.420735.71550@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I don't believe in atheists wrote:
THE HIGH UNINTELLIGENCE OF ATHEISM
GOOD MORNING CLASS: At this moment, I would like to have you to visit
alt.atheism. As you know, each time I have had you visit this news group,
it
was for the purpose of conducting an experiment to prove a point about
atheism. In every case, the truth and point I wanted to make were proved
overwhelmingly by the responses everyone of the atheists gave.
One experiment was designed to prove that atheism is not about proof but
is
about rejecting certain fundamental truths. I asked the atheists who
believe
in abortion to *prove* that human embryos and fetuses aren't human. Over
the
course of a weeks time, you observed some of the most ridiculous and
insane
responses. Not even the most so-called "educated" respondents provided
the
least proof.
Another experiment was designed to prove that the most educated atheists
aren't really intelligent. In order to prove that truth, I asked only the
most educated atheists to respond to my post. All I simply asked the
atheists to do was to prove that there is nothing that is eternal.
However,
the responses you observed were the most unintellectual you have ever
read.
They ranged from cursing, name calling, cynicism, mockery, the posting of
pictures to ridicule and etc. There was not one intelligent response from
any of the respondents.
Now if you will, look at alt. atheism at this moment. Note the many
unintelligent subjects in the headers of each post. Try also reading the
content of the various posts. All of them manifest the deepest of
unintelligence. Most are pure senselessness and vanity. All basically
manifest a hatred for God and true Christianity and etc. If God's
existence
is no more than the tooth fairy's or santa clause's, why do atheists put
so
much time, effort and money into trying to disprove God's existence? None
of
them are doing the same for the tooth fairy.
The web sites that atheists have placed on the internet also manifest the
unintelligence of atheism. Note all the unintelligent names of the sites.
Note also the unintelligent content of those sites.
When anyone note the content of atheistic news groups, atheistic web
sites
and all other atheistic material on the web and in the world, no person
in
his/her right mind can conclude that atheists are truly intelligent
people.
The only way anyone can conclude that atheists are intelligent people is
to
use the twisted and unintelligent logic of atheism.
(Lee)
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in
philosophy
bringeth men's minds about to religion.
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in
philosophy
bringeth men's minds about to religion.
Thank you for posting the results of your in depth scientific study on
the intellectual abilities of the atheist coomunity to sci.sceptics.
Ummmm.did you say *Scientific?*
It by no means had anything scientific in it.
What paper mill did you get your degree at?
We are now all impressed by the innovative methodology used to
establish and demonstrate the mean intelligence quotients typical to
the non-religious subgroup of the human species.
<Ummm.......you apparently have the IQ of a salad bar because there was no
scientific methodology involved?
What was the name of that institution?
Sadly you did not
indicate the method of statistical analysis used in the validation of
the results of your experiments.
Sadly,I did not attempt to?
Where is my dilemma?
Luckily your deep religious intuition
firmly placed you on a path of thought, which cut through the drab
necessity of scientific precison and reasoning.
Your insults (if such weak attempts can be called insults) are so obviously
premeditated/manufactured that they've lost any and all impact due to
deplorable timing. They smell of laborious and painstaking design, which
cancels any impact that might be gained by a true, sharp whit. Are you
understanding this? Probably not, but I expected as much. See, your kind are
a dime a dozen. Always trying to out-insult someone. The sad thing is that
no one's even trying to insult you. You've invented dragons to slay, and it's
sadly telling.
Your summary of results
clearly demonstrate the significance of your conclusions.
It is amazing how an superb mind is able to grasp such an important
idea of immense importance to all humanity, then create a conlusion
which makes the experiment a completely unnecessary formality. You are
a true genius!
abandonment issues, lol - separation anxiety as the last remaining pair of
brain cells drift ever farther apart?
At your earliest convenience, please let us have a copy of your
experiment protocol.
We are in the planning phase of an experiment of
<Snip Parroted blather>
That wasn't a bad effort for a drooling spastic with a rather large hole in
its rather small head.
Here , have mommy read this to you.
I haven't seen anything that remarkable since the that Chinese Down's
Syndrome kid threw a lance a full seven feet at the last Special Olympics.
Admittedly, it wedged in the chest of his coach who was standing seven feet
behind him, but it was still pretty impressive. But then, world records are
nothing novel to you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Keczup" |
|
| Title: "Religious hatred" |
14 Aug 2005 02:58:24 PM |
|
|
... is a tautology.
Example 2:
<Snip Parroted blather>
That wasn't a bad effort for a drooling spastic with a rather large hole in
its rather small head.
Here , have mommy read this to you.
I haven't seen anything that remarkable since the that Chinese Down's
Syndrome kid threw a lance a full seven feet at the last Special Olympics.
Admittedly, it wedged in the chest of his coach who was standing seven feet
behind him, but it was still pretty impressive. But then, world records are
nothing novel to you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "I dont believe in atheists" |
|
| Title: Re: "Religious hatred" |
14 Aug 2005 03:16:36 PM |
|
|
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy
bringeth men's minds about to religion.
"Pastor Keczup" <user13@heathens.org.uk> wrote in message
news:1124049504.378951.181450@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
.. is a tautology.
<smack>
And atheism's stupidity cuts deep to the bone.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: "Religious hatred" |
14 Aug 2005 07:46:37 PM |
|
|
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in message
news:yENLe.36$RU.973@news.uswest.net...
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in
philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion.
"Pastor Keczup" <user13@heathens.org.uk> wrote in message
news:1124049504.378951.181450@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
.. is a tautology.
<smack>
And atheism's stupidity cuts deep to the bone.
Wow! How did you come up with this bit of meaningless profound nonsense!
You seem unaware that atheism is founded on scientific objective verifiable
and
reproducible evidence. Your religion is founded on faith in pure myths with
no
objective verifiable evidence.
Which is stupid???
.
|
|
|
| User: "I dont believe in atheists" |
|
| Title: The Origin of Atheism |
14 Aug 2005 08:55:29 PM |
|
|
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy
bringeth men's minds about to religion.
"Bill" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:LzRLe.11252$Rm3.11135@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in message
news:yENLe.36$RU.973@news.uswest.net...
--
a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in
philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion.
"Pastor Keczup" <user13@heathens.org.uk> wrote in message
news:1124049504.378951.181450@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
.. is a tautology.
<smack>
And atheism's stupidity cuts deep to the bone.
Wow! How did you come up with this bit of meaningless profound nonsense!
You seem unaware that atheism is founded on scientific objective
verifiable
<Smack>
THE ORIGIN OF ATHEISM
Do you know that if you make an endeavor to find out when and by whom
atheism was authored you will not be able to find such information from any
source? Not even the most "educated" atheists - particularly those
associated with the most elite universities throughout the world can
truthfully inform you when and by whom atheism originated. They can
enlighten you as to who were its main perpetuators in different cultures;
but they cannot identify its founder and when it actually originated.
The absence of a known author and time of origin of such a highly embraced
philosophy is a strange phenomenon. But this phenomenon is highly
indicative. It suggests that atheism is not of earthly origin - that it had
its birth in another sphere before this state of time. Atheism is not a
manmade doctrine but a doctrine of the demons. Its originator is none other
than the old serpent himself, namely, satan. It had its origin from the very
one it deceptively denies exists. It is a doctrine which denies the
authorship and existence of its own author! This accounts for the absence of
information in any literature embraced by atheists that identify both a
human author and earthly time of origin for atheism.
The process by which atheism originated was much more involved than can be
explained here, so a simple presentation of the basic principles that gave
it birth must suffice. I will endeavor to explain how atheism had its origin
by first directing your attention to a principle in the Bible found in
Romans Chapter 9, verse 14. The Holy Spirit who spoke through the pen of the
Apostle Paul, drew a conclusion from what is presented in the previous
verses. In the entire chapter, He teaches that God is sovereign over the
salvation and reprobation of humans - that God does not love everybody -
that He decreed that some should be the objects of His eternal love and the
rest should be the objects of His eternal wrath - that God, from His own
will, has mercy on some humans while He hardens the rest. He has done this
apart from anything they do good or bad. He teaches that humans are not
truly masters of their destinies, but God is - that the details of their
lives and destinies were foreordained by God in eternity past - before He
brought any of them into existence. Then He asked the question: "...There is
no injustice with God, is there?" We are then very emphatically given the
divine answer: "May it never be!"
The Holy Spirit implies from the question that graceless humans who are
informed about the truths of God's sovereignty over the salvation and
reprobation of humans will falsely conclude that God is unjust for loving
some and hating the others - for decreeing that those He love should spend
eternity in heaven and decreeing those He hates to spend eternity in the
lake of fire, both apart fom anything they do good or bad in this world. A
false conclusion that God is unjust for His actions is what began the birth
process of atheism. It is very important to keep that fact in mind.
A conclusion that the Almighty Righteous God is unjust or wrong for any of
His actions cannot be arrived at except through the total depravity of those
who draw such a conclusion. So in order to understand how atheism had it
origin, It is crucial to realize that the total depravity of the nature of
satan is the key principle that underlies the origin of atheism. The total
depravity of both the human and demonic natures is really none other than an
antithetical principle or law to God and His Law. If you liken God and His
righteousness to light and the total depravity of humans and demons to
darkness, you can understand the antithetical nature of the two to one
another. Light and darkness can never coexist; the one always dispels the
other. Thus, the two are ANTI to one another. When the one expresses itself
in the presence of the other, the other repels and cannot agree with the
other, regardless of the expression. Atheism had its origin through the
practical mental reaction of satan's depravity towards God's actions. The
response of satan's depravity was the false conclusion that the actions of
God are wrong or evil.
Even though the conclusion that God is unjust is high error and was known by
satan to be so, his total depravity nevertheless made it impossible for him
to conclude otherwise. Depravity must direct the hearts of its graceless
subjects against God even though they know better. This is because of the
very antithetical nature of depravity to God and His Law. The nature of both
human and demonic depravity is an unvarying and uncompromising principle
that works apart from what its subjects know and remains opposed to God at
all times despite God's actions and despite their knowledge that it is
impossible for God to be wrong.
The negative expressions of God towards the existence and outworkings of the
depraved natures of humans and demons is always right, whereas the negative
expressions and opposition of the depraved natures of humans and demons
towards God are always wrong. The very antithetical nature of the depravity
of graceless humans and demons invariably enslaves them to react negatively
to God regardless of what God does. Therefore, their depravity reacts
negatively to God, despite the fact that God can never do evil and despite
the fact that He is always perfectly innocent. Here lies also the origin of
insanity.
In order for satan to have arrived at the false conclusion that God is
unjust in the midst of full knowledge that it is impossible for God to be
so, his depravity had to cause him in principle to haughtily and deceptively
seek to raise himself above God in order to judge God's actions. It was a
haughty attempt of a measly, totally depraved creature to reduce the
Almighty God to the level of a creature and to raise himself to the position
of God in order to subject God's actions to his own judgement. It is
impossible for the Almighty God to be debased to the level of a measly,
depraved creature; and it is just as impossible for a measly, totally
depraved creature to be exhalted to the level of the Almighty God. Satan
understood this very well. However, his depravity nevertheless made him
endeavor to assume such a deceptive role.
In order for satan to have endeavored to judge God, there had to be in place
some type of opinion, philosophy, religion, charter or law by which he used
to try to judge God. But God is not subject to anything. Nothing exists
whatsoever that God is subject to or responsible to obey. God is not subject
even to the most noble law in the universe - the TEN COMMANDMENTS - which He
made for mankind, nor to any law made for the angels. He is above all laws
and does only His own will. So there is no law He can possibly violate by
any of His actions. Therefore, He cannot be rightly judged to be wrong in
any action He performs. The only choices satan had by which to seek to judge
God were some form of his own depravity - the antithetical principle of
evil - the law of sin, or the most noble Law in the universe - the TEN
COMMANDMENTS. Either choice would be the evil one attempting to judge the
Righteous One - evil trying to condemn the rightousness as being evil - an
impossibility and absolute deception. But he probably chose the latter so as
to make God deceptively appear wrong by His own Law. Again, an impossibility
and absolute deception.
Once satan deceptively drew the conclusion that God is wrong, the inference
created within him a deep, abiding but unjust hatred and wrath for God. The
ultimate end of all hatred is the death or complete destruction of the
object of hatred. The hatred that satan had for God was not satisfied with
merely seeking to punish God. It was satisfied with nothing less than God's
annihilation.
But satan's foolish wrath created huge dilemmas for him. Although he wrongly
concluded that God is unjust and wanted God annihilated as a result, he also
clearly understood that it is impossible for God to be subject to his or
anyone's feelings, opinions, religions, philosophies, charters or laws, or
any law God has made. But he was nevertheless forced by his depravity to
make a condemning judgement against God which sought God's annihilation. (A
condemning judgement against God in the midst of the absence of a law that
can condemn Him is insane hatred pure and simple.) But then he was faced
with his knowledge that it is impossible for God to be destroyed by anyone,
any means or anything. But his depravity and insane hatred for God insisted
that God be annihilated! The dilemmas only served to inflame his foolish
wrath. So after ranting and raving to no effect, the only way possible for
him to gain some satisfaction from his rage and a semblance of the
destruction of God in the midst of his understanding that God cannot be
annihilated was through deception. He had to begin to deny the existence of
God in full knowledge of His existence. This was the actual deceptive and
utterly foolish birth of atheism.
The birth of atheism deceptively made satan feel free from his
responsibility to obey and worship God, even though he also knew he wasn't
free. It made him deceptively feel he had the freedom to think and speak
whatever he wanted without the feeling that it was sin, even though he knew
this was not so. It made him deceptively feel that there is no punishment
from God awaiting him, even though he knows full well there is. With God
supposedly out of the picture, satan could establish all of the various
erroneous manmade and demonic philosophies, religions, opinions and etc. in
the world and none of them would be wrong in the eyes of his atheism.
Democracy could be established to give all these the right of existence.
Hence the birth of demonic democracy.
Lets recount the demonic steps that led to the birth of atheism: First came
the measly and totally depraved demon's deceptive efforts to exhalt himself
to the level of the Almighty God and his deceptive efforts to debase God to
the level of a depraved creature. Second came his deceptive efforts to judge
God's actions by the demon's own depravity or by the law God made for human
or angels. Third came the demon's deceived conclusion that God is unjust or
wrong in what He does. Fourth came his deceptive effort to impose the
sentence of annihilation upon God's existence. And fifth came the deceptive
denial of the existence of God as a substitute for an impossibe annihilation
of God. As you can see, each step from beginning to end during the birth of
atheism was pure deception on the part of one who knows the truth. This
proves that atheism is pure deception.
You will find those five principles at work in the hearts of every atheist.
The conclusion that the One and only True God doesn't exist cannot be
derived except through deception. Atheism didn't receive its origin by a
true absence of proof of God's existence, because there has always been and
always will be overwhelming proof to the contrary. Atheism had its origin by
the expression of satan's depravity towards God, and it is embraced,
maintained and perpetuated among graceless humans as a result of their total
depravity. In other words, atheists follow in the footsteps of their master,
the devil.
It was pointed out earlier that "The negative expression and opposition of
the depraved natures of humans and demons towards God in regards to any of
His actions are always wrong". It can't be any other way, because God is
perfectly holy and therefore incapable of performing evil in any of His
actions. Thus, in every case wherein humans or demons judge God to be wrong,
it is done through the total depravity and deep hatred of those who are evil
and already condemned because of being evil. Evil can never rightly condemn
the righteous or the innocent. Any attempt to do is nothing but injustce.
The perfect holines of God, His inability to sin and the impossibility of
any creature or thing to condemn Him is clearly understood by those who
express their foolish wrath towards God. This understanding adds to the
heinousness of atheism. Atheism was born out of the deep depravity and
deceptive wrath of the lowest creature that ever existed. His anger towards
God amounts to a deep desire to murder the Most High God, to get rid of all
righteousness and establish evil as if it is good - in the midst of his
knowledge that such is impossible. Thus, the wrath that he has towards God -
his desire to murder and annihilate Him, has fallen on his own head. That
is, the deep wrath of the Almighty God is upon him. He cannot carry out his
wrath upon God, but there is nothing that can stop God from pouring out His
wrath upon him. All who are of like mind as satan - who embrace his atheism
also has the wrath of the Almighty God against them. If God doesn't grant
them His grace, they shall suffer eternal punishment in the lake of fire
with satan. "...There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!"
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Skeptic" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
14 Aug 2005 10:13:01 PM |
|
|
I don't believe in atheists wrote:
::snip::
There are three chapters devoted to the issue of predestination versus
free will in a book entitled "The Doctrines That Divide." The author is
Erwin Lutzer. In all three chapters, Lutzer confidently believes that
predestination is factual and true, that God has decreed that some men
will be saved and the rest damned. However, in the third chapter, he
presents a counterargument by John Wesley, founder of the Methodist
Church. Wesley's arguments are nothing if not a continuous verbal
assault against any god who would randomly save some and damn the rest.
Wesley makes it abundantly clear that such a god is evil, heinous, and
not worthy of human worship. In addition, he states that if such a god
existed, then Satan should just sit back and let that god do all of
Satan's work for him because surely that god would be infinitely more
capable of destroying those he wished to destroy than Satan would.
I find Wesley's arguments to be substantially accurate. Suppose several
hundred Jewish people were randomly selected by a Nazi death camp
officer to be spared execution while everyone else was to be put to
their deaths. The saved ones were offered not only their lives, but
also a chance to rule with the officer and to share in his glory.
Knowing that all of their families had been put to death by decree of
this officer and that their families had no say whatsoever in the
matter, would any of these surviving Jews seriously consider thanking
the officer for saving them? Would they be so indebted to him that they
would pledge their eternal devotion and love to him? Only an insane man
would.
The only answer to the verses Paul mentions in Romans that makes any
sense is that God the Father knew before the creation of the world who
would respond to His Son and who would not. And so at the time of His
Son's death, God placed the sins of only those He foreknew would accept
His Son as their Savior on His Son's shoulders. To believe that God
would save some and damn others simply because that's what He wanted to
do would be to make God out to be even worse than ourselves. Truly, it
would make Him to be even worse than Satan himself. A Christian who
does not mind dutifully serving a god who he knows might have damned the
entire rest of his earthly family has serious mental problems that need
to be examined. There are enough difficult issues in this world that
makes us question God's motives and plans without us also having to
grapple with the issue of whether or not the god we serve is a Nazi
barbarian.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Blake" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 06:32:19 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:13:01 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
The only answer to the verses Paul mentions in Romans that makes any
sense is that God the Father knew before the creation of the world who
would respond to His Son and who would not. And so at the time of His
Son's death, God placed the sins of only those He foreknew would accept
His Son as their Savior on His Son's shoulders. To believe that God
would save some and damn others simply because that's what He wanted to
do would be to make God out to be even worse than ourselves. Truly, it
would make Him to be even worse than Satan himself. A Christian who
does not mind dutifully serving a god who he knows might have damned the
entire rest of his earthly family has serious mental problems that need
to be examined. There are enough difficult issues in this world that
makes us question God's motives and plans without us also having to
grapple with the issue of whether or not the god we serve is a Nazi
barbarian.
But that is just what you do have to face up to. You admit that God
knew before he created the world that there would be those who did not
believe in his existence, indeed could not believe simply because they
saw his existence as unevidenced. Nevertheless, he went ahead with his
plans regardless of the human suffering he knew it would cause. That
makes him a monster in my book and far worse than any human has ever
been.
John
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Skeptic" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 07:38:11 AM |
|
|
John Blake wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:13:01 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
The only answer to the verses Paul mentions in Romans that makes any
sense is that God the Father knew before the creation of the world who
would respond to His Son and who would not. And so at the time of His
Son's death, God placed the sins of only those He foreknew would accept
His Son as their Savior on His Son's shoulders. To believe that God
would save some and damn others simply because that's what He wanted to
do would be to make God out to be even worse than ourselves. Truly, it
would make Him to be even worse than Satan himself. A Christian who
does not mind dutifully serving a god who he knows might have damned the
entire rest of his earthly family has serious mental problems that need
to be examined. There are enough difficult issues in this world that
makes us question God's motives and plans without us also having to
grapple with the issue of whether or not the god we serve is a Nazi
barbarian.
But that is just what you do have to face up to. You admit that God
knew before he created the world that there would be those who did not
believe in his existence, indeed could not believe simply because they
saw his existence as unevidenced. Nevertheless, he went ahead with his
plans regardless of the human suffering he knew it would cause. That
makes him a monster in my book and far worse than any human has ever
been.
John
Why? He creates the world and tells the first man that he communes with
every day "Don't do this." What does the man do? He does exactly what
God told him not to, even though he enjoys God's presence on a daily
basis and has all the proof he needs that God is real. So man disobeys
and loses his communion with God. Shortly after this man commits his
first murder. By the time of Noah, man has been breeding with angels
for so long that the human race, apart from Noah and his family, no
longer even resembles the people God had created. So they are
destroyed. Fast forward to the time of Christ. God has sent His Son on
a mission to pay the price for the sins of men, and exactly what is it
anyone expects Him to do? Even when He communed with humanity, they
still disobeyed Him. So having proof that He exists so that man might
believe He exists is not exactly what's on His mind. He wants His
people to do more than just believe in Him. Satan and the demons
already believe, but that belief does them no good. He wants his people
to love and obey Him, and that is beyond any man's ability to do on a
consistent basis. God knows this. He also knew who would believe His
Son and what His Son had done for them. He also knows that there were
many many people that would not believe no matter how many chances they
were given or how much evidence might be presented to them. These
people were determined to let other things convince them that it was all
a pack of lies. The only way God could save all men, both those who
wanted to believe and those who did not, would be to force them all to
believe as well as to obey and love him. But that violates one of God's
core characteristics, that being his embrace of free will. Being made
in God's image, we also have that free will, but we lack the eternal
view of all things that God has. As a result, we are unable to see the
consequences of our decisions, whether good or bad. God can see those
consequences. We cannot. If we could, perhaps we would all be on our
best behavior. But it has been chosen for us not to know those things
through our own abilities. Instead, God has warned man of what those
consequences would be in a general way by telling us that if we step
outside the perimeters he has established for us, then there will be a
price to pay. Some people will believe that and try to live their lives
to please God, and if they fail, their sins are forgiven if they repent
and ask for forgiveness. Everyone else chooses to disbelieve that there
is a God and to follow their own intellect instead of their Creator's
guidelines.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack Dominey" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 09:25:20 AM |
|
|
In <43008CEE.9CF@dialup.slow>, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
Why? He creates the world and tells the first man that he communes with
every day "Don't do this." What does the man do? He does exactly what
God told him not to, even though he enjoys God's presence on a daily
basis and has all the proof he needs that God is real.
And God didn't know this was going to happen? God had no choice in
how (according to this myth) He created Adam?
So man disobeys
and loses his communion with God.
And (again according to the myth) so do all Adam's descendents, even
though they had nothing to do with this disobedience.
Shortly after this man commits his
first murder.
No, the first murderer was Cain, Adam's son.
By the time of Noah, man has been breeding with angels
for so long that the human race, apart from Noah and his family, no
longer even resembles the people God had created.
That's a forced interpretation attempting to get around the fact that
God says he screwed up: "So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom
I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and
creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am
grieved that I have made them." Gen 6:7
It does *not* say "I am grieved that I allowed the 'sons of God' to
corrupt my creation."
So they are
destroyed. Fast forward to the time of Christ. God has sent His Son on
a mission to pay the price for the sins of men, and exactly what is it
anyone expects Him to do?
Oh, I don't know, maybe fix things so the vast majority of mankind
isn't sent to eternal damnation?
You think the answer has something to do with compromising "free
will"? Here's your free will: You have the ability, just like most
people, to walk on your knees. It's clumsy, slow, and painful, but
you can do it. You can freely choose to go around knee-walking any
time and as much as you want. When you wish to walk somewhere, you
have the *choice* of walking on your knees instead of your feet.
You'll choose your feet. It's clear, if you're a Christian, that God
made you to walk on your feet. But you've still got that free will,
right?
*Why isn't it the same way with "sin"?*
What kept God from building the universe in such a way that "sin" is
possible but as unlikely as knee-walking? After all, according to one
story, He made the angels such that they could rebel, but only 1/3 of
them did.
<snip remainder>
--
"I'm gonna act grown up/That's my plan"
Jack Dominey
jack_dominey (at) email (dot) com
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Skeptic" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 09:47:49 AM |
|
|
Jack Dominey wrote:
In <43008CEE.9CF@dialup.slow>, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
Why? He creates the world and tells the first man that he communes with
every day "Don't do this." What does the man do? He does exactly what
God told him not to, even though he enjoys God's presence on a daily
basis and has all the proof he needs that God is real.
And God didn't know this was going to happen? God had no choice in
how (according to this myth) He created Adam?
The problem involves the idea of the Trinity, which is something my
friends accept but I reject. I believe in Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit. That is all. Anything else is based on someone's
interpretation of various Biblical passges which I do not find
supportive of the Trinity. And if there's no Trinity, then since Christ
is the declared Creator of the world and since He makes it clear in the
Gospels that He does not know every single thing that the Father knows,
then I believe He did not know that His creation would fail.
So man disobeys
and loses his communion with God.
And (again according to the myth) so do all Adam's descendents, even
though they had nothing to do with this disobedience.
If you have the HIV virus and become pregnant, won't your child also
have the virus? The knowledge of good and evil was not some awareness
that only Adam and Eve would possess. Just as the Tree of Life would
have had qualities in its fruit to enable man to live forever, so also
would the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil also have had qualities
that would have enabled man to know the difference between good and
evil. Whatever that was was passed through Adam to his offspring, thus
allowing them to also know the difference between good and evil.
Shortly after this man commits his
first murder.
No, the first murderer was Cain, Adam's son.
My fault. I was lumping all men under the "this man" term, and I should
not have done that.
By the time of Noah, man has been breeding with angels
for so long that the human race, apart from Noah and his family, no
longer even resembles the people God had created.
That's a forced interpretation attempting to get around the fact that
God says he screwed up: "So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom
I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and
creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am
grieved that I have made them." Gen 6:7
Again, the God of the Old Testament is not the Father, who knows all
things and cannot make a mistake, but the Son, who admitted that He does
not know all things, but only what God reveals to Him. If this were not
so, then Christ would not have grieved over something He already knew
would happen. He also would not have wept at the death of Lazarus if He
had foreknowledge to know that Lazarus would live again. And again, why
pray to the Father that He be spared the cup of suffering if He had the
foreknowledge to know that His death was a certainty and not just one of
two or three alternatives.
It does *not* say "I am grieved that I allowed the 'sons of God' to
corrupt my creation."
So they are
destroyed. Fast forward to the time of Christ. God has sent His Son on
a mission to pay the price for the sins of men, and exactly what is it
anyone expects Him to do?
Oh, I don't know, maybe fix things so the vast majority of mankind
isn't sent to eternal damnation?
He did, but that doesn't alter man's free will. Just as the rich man
had seen Christ and knew of His powers, he also rejected Christ because
the here and now (his wealth) was more important to him than the
hereafter. So what would you have Jesus do? Force the man to believe
so that his enjoyment of Heaven is forced instead of enjoyed freely?
You think the answer has something to do with compromising "free
will"? Here's your free will: You have the ability, just like most
people, to walk on your knees. It's clumsy, slow, and painful, but
you can do it. You can freely choose to go around knee-walking any
time and as much as you want. When you wish to walk somewhere, you
have the *choice* of walking on your knees instead of your feet.
You'll choose your feet. It's clear, if you're a Christian, that God
made you to walk on your feet. But you've still got that free will,
right?
*Why isn't it the same way with "sin"?*
What kept God from building the universe in such a way that "sin" is
possible but as unlikely as knee-walking?
Well essentially there are two things that kept Him from doing that.
One is that He had to allow Satan his chance to tempt man. To refuse to
do so would have been to give the angels who had not rebelled reason to
think that God had something to hide or was afraid that Satan might be
telling the truth about God. The second is that He hid from man the
foreknowledge of every action's consequences. Man was created as
dependent on God, not independent of Him. Had man had foreknowledge of
his actions' consequences, then he would have trusted his own
foreknowledge and not God.
After all, according to one
story, He made the angels such that they could rebel, but only 1/3 of
them did.
Angels and men are quite different. They stand in the presence of God
quite often and can see more than we can see. It's surprising to me
that even 1/3 rebelled, but it does serve to show why more than just 1/3
of men will not enter Heaven.
<snip remainder>
--
"I'm gonna act grown up/That's my plan"
Jack Dominey
jack_dominey (at) email (dot) com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Blake" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 09:36:44 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:38:11 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
John Blake wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:13:01 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
The only answer to the verses Paul mentions in Romans that makes any
sense is that God the Father knew before the creation of the world who
would respond to His Son and who would not. And so at the time of His
Son's death, God placed the sins of only those He foreknew would accept
His Son as their Savior on His Son's shoulders. To believe that God
would save some and damn others simply because that's what He wanted to
do would be to make God out to be even worse than ourselves. Truly, it
would make Him to be even worse than Satan himself. A Christian who
does not mind dutifully serving a god who he knows might have damned the
entire rest of his earthly family has serious mental problems that need
to be examined. There are enough difficult issues in this world that
makes us question God's motives and plans without us also having to
grapple with the issue of whether or not the god we serve is a Nazi
barbarian.
But that is just what you do have to face up to. You admit that God
knew before he created the world that there would be those who did not
believe in his existence, indeed could not believe simply because they
saw his existence as unevidenced. Nevertheless, he went ahead with his
plans regardless of the human suffering he knew it would cause. That
makes him a monster in my book and far worse than any human has ever
been.
John
Why? He creates the world and tells the first man that he communes with
every day "Don't do this." What does the man do? He does exactly what
God told him not to, even though he enjoys God's presence on a daily
basis and has all the proof he needs that God is real. So man disobeys
and loses his communion with God. Shortly after this man commits his
first murder. By the time of Noah, man has been breeding with angels
for so long that the human race, apart from Noah and his family, no
longer even resembles the people God had created. So they are
destroyed. Fast forward to the time of Christ. God has sent His Son on
a mission to pay the price for the sins of men, and exactly what is it
anyone expects Him to do? Even when He communed with humanity, they
still disobeyed Him. So having proof that He exists so that man might
believe He exists is not exactly what's on His mind. He wants His
people to do more than just believe in Him. Satan and the demons
already believe, but that belief does them no good. He wants his people
to love and obey Him, and that is beyond any man's ability to do on a
consistent basis. God knows this. He also knew who would believe His
Son and what His Son had done for them. He also knows that there were
many many people that would not believe no matter how many chances they
were given or how much evidence might be presented to them. These
people were determined to let other things convince them that it was all
a pack of lies. The only way God could save all men, both those who
wanted to believe and those who did not, would be to force them all to
believe as well as to obey and love him. But that violates one of God's
core characteristics, that being his embrace of free will. Being made
in God's image, we also have that free will, but we lack the eternal
view of all things that God has. As a result, we are unable to see the
consequences of our decisions, whether good or bad. God can see those
consequences. We cannot. If we could, perhaps we would all be on our
best behavior. But it has been chosen for us not to know those things
through our own abilities. Instead, God has warned man of what those
consequences would be in a general way by telling us that if we step
outside the perimeters he has established for us, then there will be a
price to pay. Some people will believe that and try to live their lives
to please God, and if they fail, their sins are forgiven if they repent
and ask for forgiveness. Everyone else chooses to disbelieve that there
is a God and to follow their own intellect instead of their Creator's
guidelines.
Just for the sake of argument, let's take what you have written as
being close to the truth. God has made a set of people to inhabit this
earth. He decided to give them free will, and now seems to be
complaining because they are using it. It seems to me that he should
give whatever it is he has promised to those who bow and scrape to him
and those who can't bring themselves to abandon reason and what
appears to them to be reality, he should leave to live their lives
(and afterlives of course) as they please. Why should he be so keen on
the punishment route? What would he get out of it? After all, it's not
an inevitable consequence, he can set things up as he likes, can't he?
Or are you saying he's not as powerful as he's made out to be?
John
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Skeptic" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 09:59:53 AM |
|
|
John Blake wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:38:11 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
John Blake wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:13:01 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
The only answer to the verses Paul mentions in Romans that makes any
sense is that God the Father knew before the creation of the world who
would respond to His Son and who would not. And so at the time of His
Son's death, God placed the sins of only those He foreknew would accept
His Son as their Savior on His Son's shoulders. To believe that God
would save some and damn others simply because that's what He wanted to
do would be to make God out to be even worse than ourselves. Truly, it
would make Him to be even worse than Satan himself. A Christian who
does not mind dutifully serving a god who he knows might have damned the
entire rest of his earthly family has serious mental problems that need
to be examined. There are enough difficult issues in this world that
makes us question God's motives and plans without us also having to
grapple with the issue of whether or not the god we serve is a Nazi
barbarian.
But that is just what you do have to face up to. You admit that God
knew before he created the world that there would be those who did not
believe in his existence, indeed could not believe simply because they
saw his existence as unevidenced. Nevertheless, he went ahead with his
plans regardless of the human suffering he knew it would cause. That
makes him a monster in my book and far worse than any human has ever
been.
John
Why? He creates the world and tells the first man that he communes with
every day "Don't do this." What does the man do? He does exactly what
God told him not to, even though he enjoys God's presence on a daily
basis and has all the proof he needs that God is real. So man disobeys
and loses his communion with God. Shortly after this man commits his
first murder. By the time of Noah, man has been breeding with angels
for so long that the human race, apart from Noah and his family, no
longer even resembles the people God had created. So they are
destroyed. Fast forward to the time of Christ. God has sent His Son on
a mission to pay the price for the sins of men, and exactly what is it
anyone expects Him to do? Even when He communed with humanity, they
still disobeyed Him. So having proof that He exists so that man might
believe He exists is not exactly what's on His mind. He wants His
people to do more than just believe in Him. Satan and the demons
already believe, but that belief does them no good. He wants his people
to love and obey Him, and that is beyond any man's ability to do on a
consistent basis. God knows this. He also knew who would believe His
Son and what His Son had done for them. He also knows that there were
many many people that would not believe no matter how many chances they
were given or how much evidence might be presented to them. These
people were determined to let other things convince them that it was all
a pack of lies. The only way God could save all men, both those who
wanted to believe and those who did not, would be to force them all to
believe as well as to obey and love him. But that violates one of God's
core characteristics, that being his embrace of free will. Being made
in God's image, we also have that free will, but we lack the eternal
view of all things that God has. As a result, we are unable to see the
consequences of our decisions, whether good or bad. God can see those
consequences. We cannot. If we could, perhaps we would all be on our
best behavior. But it has been chosen for us not to know those things
through our own abilities. Instead, God has warned man of what those
consequences would be in a general way by telling us that if we step
outside the perimeters he has established for us, then there will be a
price to pay. Some people will believe that and try to live their lives
to please God, and if they fail, their sins are forgiven if they repent
and ask for forgiveness. Everyone else chooses to disbelieve that there
is a God and to follow their own intellect instead of their Creator's
guidelines.
Just for the sake of argument, let's take what you have written as
being close to the truth. God has made a set of people to inhabit this
earth. He decided to give them free will, and now seems to be
complaining because they are using it. It seems to me that he should
give whatever it is he has promised to those who bow and scrape to him
and those who can't bring themselves to abandon reason and what
appears to them to be reality, he should leave to live their lives
(and afterlives of course) as they please. Why should he be so keen on
the punishment route? What would he get out of it? After all, it's not
an inevitable consequence, he can set things up as he likes, can't he?
Or are you saying he's not as powerful as he's made out to be?
John
The problem with Christ's powers is that He is limited by his own
qualities. Can He force all men to do as He wills? Of course. But his
very nature forbids Him from doing that. As far as letting people live
as they would like after having rejected Him, you're missing the point
entirely. That is exactly what He is going to do. Once the saved are
in Heaven, there can only be two places for man to go. One, of course,
is Heaven, and the other is Hell. Those who have rejected God must go
there. Now don't believe those who would claim that all the lost in
Hell will suffer the same fate. Christ made it clear that although all
will suffer the same sense of loss that will cause them to gnash their
teeth and wail endlessly, there are also difference degrees of
punishment in Hell. Some people's suffering will be worse than others.
The same is true in Heaven. Not everyone who gets in will all have the
same rewards. They will, of course, all have eternal life with Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit, but as my friends and I like to say, some will
have mansions and other will have outhouses. In other words, some will
have more glory and power than others. It all depends on their actions
in this life. So Mother Theresa might have so much more glory in Heaven
than I will, and an atheist who spends his life helping his fellow man
will suffer less in Hell than Hitler would. But once in Hell, you will
be, as some have said, having your own way forever. The problem is that
you will not be alone. Satan and his fellow angels who fell will also
be there, and his hatred of humanity will cause him to torment everyone
to some degree or other. So whatever Hell turns out to be, it has to be
considerably horrific beyond man's imagination, even for the best of
atheists, for Christ to have allowed Himself to suffer such humiliating
treatment and torture and then to die an excruciating death on the
cross. Someone willling to do that for you must know something about
the afterlife that you don't.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joseki" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 10:35:49 AM |
|
|
Quoting Nosterill:
I wonder how rapidly the major religions would
decline if they were not drummed into impressionable minds from
infancy. If the "god theory" wasn't introduced until adulthood, I
suspect that the overwhelming majority would find it laughable.
I must respectfully disagree with you. There appears to be something
instrinsic to men and women that when a straighforward explanation does
not exist they make up one (see Dawkins writings on this phenomenon)..
It is only when humans acquire reason and logic that a rejection of
supernatural explanations occurs.
While a young person would be unlikely to imagine the Byzantine
complexity of Islam, Judaism, or Christianity, I would certainly expect
an inmature person to have a supernatural explanation for many
phenomena until he matures. In many cases this wold include a being
resembling G~d.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Skeptic" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 11:09:36 AM |
|
|
Joseki wrote:
Quoting Nosterill:
I wonder how rapidly the major religions would
decline if they were not drummed into impressionable minds from
infancy. If the "god theory" wasn't introduced until adulthood, I
suspect that the overwhelming majority would find it laughable.
I must respectfully disagree with you. There appears to be something
instrinsic to men and women that when a straighforward explanation does
not exist they make up one (see Dawkins writings on this phenomenon)..
It is only when humans acquire reason and logic that a rejection of
supernatural explanations occurs.
While a young person would be unlikely to imagine the Byzantine
complexity of Islam, Judaism, or Christianity, I would certainly expect
an inmature person to have a supernatural explanation for many
phenomena until he matures. In many cases this wold include a being
resembling G~d.
Has it occured to anyone that, except for the miracles of Christ and the
apostles, God has for the most part accomplished all of His miracles
using completely natural means? And perhaps there is something to the
idea that there are more than four dimensions in our universe. We exist
in the four we know about, but what about the others that we are only
beginning to suspect MIGHT exist? What if the beings we call
"supernatural" are really natural beings existing in other dimensions?
I once read an article that suggested that if this were true, those in
the other dimensions would be able to see us, although we would not be
able to see them. They might even be able to make a part of themselves
visible to us by interacting with our dimensions a certain way, thus
appearing to us to be supernatural beings. In the end, it might just be
that there are two sets of scientific laws. One set applies to us in
our dimensions, and one set applies to the beings who exist in other
dimensions. Perhaps this is fantasy, but if such beings (angels,
demons) do exist, and if it can be shown that there are more than four
dimensions (see http://www.astronomycafe.net/cosm/dimens.html,
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/dimensions.html, and this quote
from the following link: That is a crude analogy of our situation with
God. Since God must exist in at
least eleven dimensions, and we exist in four, we
cannot detect Him if He
remains outside our world. We cannot know God unless
He reveals
Himself. In other words, He must "touch the screen"
of our world. This
analogy is crude because, in reality, there are many
more dimensions
separating us from God than those separating you from
the "screen people."
The extent and nature of God's existence are
unfathomable. http://wri.leaderu.com/articles/know.html), then is it so
impossible to believe that such beings as angels and God exist?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Danny Kodicek" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 11:42:08 AM |
|
|
"The Skeptic" <Not@dialup.slow> wrote in message
news:4300BE7B.50A8@dialup.slow...
Has it occured to anyone that, except for the miracles of Christ and the
apostles, God has for the most part accomplished all of His miracles
using completely natural means? And perhaps there is something to the
idea that there are more than four dimensions in our universe. We exist
in the four we know about, but what about the others that we are only
beginning to suspect MIGHT exist? What if the beings we call
"supernatural" are really natural beings existing in other dimensions?
I once read an article that suggested that if this were true, those in
the other dimensions would be able to see us, although we would not be
able to see them. They might even be able to make a part of themselves
visible to us by interacting with our dimensions a certain way, thus
appearing to us to be supernatural beings. In the end, it might just be
that there are two sets of scientific laws. One set applies to us in
our dimensions, and one set applies to the beings who exist in other
dimensions. Perhaps this is fantasy, but if such beings (angels,
demons) do exist, and if it can be shown that there are more than four
dimensions (see http://www.astronomycafe.net/cosm/dimens.html,
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/dimensions.html, and this quote
from the following link: That is a crude analogy of our situation with
God. Since God must exist in at
least eleven dimensions, and we exist in four, we
cannot detect Him if He
remains outside our world. We cannot know God unless
He reveals
Himself. In other words, He must "touch the screen"
of our world. This
analogy is crude because, in reality, there are many
more dimensions
separating us from God than those separating you from
the "screen people."
The extent and nature of God's existence are
unfathomable. http://wri.leaderu.com/articles/know.html), then is it so
impossible to believe that such beings as angels and God exist?
This is a perfectly reasonable argument if you're willing to accept a very
loose definition of 'God'. But what reason is there to assume that these
beings from other dimensions would have any of the qualities normally
associated with that concept, particularly benevolence? Why would they
expect worship? Are they just scientific tinkerers? It's all a bit tenuous.
Frankly, I'm happier to take the blue pill and deal with the world as a
consistently measurable reality. Metaphysical speculations about what exists
or doesn't exist outside our reality are of no interest except insofar as
they actually have a physical effect on this one. Seeing no evidence that
such effects are in operation, I'm happy to speculate that extradimensional
beings could exist, while dismissing it as a question of no immediate
interest (since unresolvable either way).
Danny
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marc L." |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 03:31:26 PM |
|
|
The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote in
news:4300BE7B.50A8@dialup.slow:
Has it occured to anyone that, except for the miracles of Christ
and the apostles, God has for the most part accomplished all of
His miracles using completely natural means?
You misswrote, "Apart from the miracles that the CHURCH claims
Christ and apostles did, all the other natural stuff as been
attributed to a non-existent god."
--
Marc
"Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as
outraged as those who are."--Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Phillips" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 01:21:59 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, The Skeptic wrote:
John Blake wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:13:01 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
The only answer to the verses Paul mentions in Romans that makes any
sense is that God the Father knew before the creation of the world who
would respond to His Son and who would not. And so at the time of His
Son's death, God placed the sins of only those He foreknew would accept
His Son as their Savior on His Son's shoulders. To believe that God
would save some and damn others simply because that's what He wanted to
do would be to make God out to be even worse than ourselves. Truly, it
would make Him to be even worse than Satan himself. A Christian who
does not mind dutifully serving a god who he knows might have damned the
entire rest of his earthly family has serious mental problems that need
to be examined. There are enough difficult issues in this world that
makes us question God's motives and plans without us also having to
grapple with the issue of whether or not the god we serve is a Nazi
barbarian.
But that is just what you do have to face up to. You admit that God
knew before he created the world that there would be those who did not
believe in his existence, indeed could not believe simply because they
saw his existence as unevidenced. Nevertheless, he went ahead with his
plans regardless of the human suffering he knew it would cause. That
makes him a monster in my book and far worse than any human has ever
been.
John
Why? He creates the world and tells the first man that he communes with
every day "Don't do this." What does the man do? He does exactly what
God told him not to, even though he enjoys God's presence on a daily
basis and has all the proof he needs that God is real.
But god *lied* to him (he ate the fruit but didn't die). How can he
go on believing anything that god tells him?
So man disobeys
and loses his communion with God. Shortly after this man commits his
first murder. By the time of Noah, man has been breeding with angels
I'm unfamiliar with the biblical passage that says that man was
"breeding with angels"--please cite it for me.
for so long that the human race, apart from Noah and his family, no
longer even resembles the people God had created.
The same people that disobeyed him, right?
So they are
destroyed. Fast forward to the time of Christ. God has sent His Son on
a mission to pay the price for the sins of men,
Why did god do this? Couldn't god simply forgive man's sins on his
own, without an intermediary? Does god have multiple personalities?
and exactly what is it
anyone expects Him to do? Even when He communed with humanity, they
still disobeyed Him. So having proof that He exists so that man might
believe He exists is not exactly what's on His mind. He wants His
people to do more than just believe in Him. Satan and the demons
already believe, but that belief does them no good. He wants his people
to love and obey Him, and that is beyond any man's ability to do on a
consistent basis.
But it's god who made man that way--why should man be punished for
being what god made him?
God knows this. He also knew who would believe His
Son and what His Son had done for them. He also knows that there were
many many people that would not believe no matter how many chances they
were given or how much evidence might be presented to them.
Imagine a Polynesian fisherman who lived 3,000 years ago. He loved
his wife and children, was kind and thoughtful of others, and never harmed
another person in his life. When he died, where did he go, heaven or hell?
These
people were determined to let other things convince them that it was all
a pack of lies. The only way God could save all men, both those who
wanted to believe and those who did not, would be to force them all to
believe as well as to obey and love him. But that violates one of God's
core characteristics, that being his embrace of free will.
Why do you think that one of god's core characteristics is his
embrace of free will? How is "Believe in me or burn in hell for all
eternity" an exercise of free will?
Being made
in God's image, we also have that free will, but we lack the eternal
view of all things that God has. As a result, we are unable to see the
consequences of our decisions, whether good or bad. God can see those
consequences. We cannot.
An oversimplification--I know that hitting an innocent person in the
head with a brick is a bad thing, so I'm aware of the consequences of some
of my actions. And the reason we can't see the consequences of all of our
actions? God. Why didn't god make it physically impossible for one man to
harm another (ex: you get a blinding headache if you try to harm someone)?
If we could, perhaps we would all be on our
best behavior.
Instead your god decided that threatening all of us with burning in
hell for all eternity was the only way? Your god lacks imagination.
But it has been chosen for us not to know those things
through our own abilities.
Who made that decision? Your god. Who bears responsibility for
that decision? Your god.
Instead, God has warned man of what those
consequences would be in a general way by telling us that if we step
outside the perimeters he has established for us, then there will be a
price to pay.
Why is burning in hell for all eternity the price for stepping out
of line? Doesn't that seem a tad extreme to you? How could a kind and
loving god even come up with something like that?
Some people will believe that and try to live their lives
to please God, and if they fail, their sins are forgiven if they repent
and ask for forgiveness. Everyone else chooses to disbelieve that there
is a God and to follow their own intellect instead of their Creator's
guidelines.
So someone who commits unspeakable atrocities their whole life can
get into heaven by claiming that they are repentant, but a buddhist who
leads an exemplary life of caring for others burns in hell for all eternity?
Your god is pretty fucked up, friend...
--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"Geez, if you're going to get *this* upset whenever I do something stupid,
then I guess I'll just have to stop doing stupid things!"
-- Homer Simpson
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Skeptic" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
15 Aug 2005 03:44:22 PM |
|
|
Jim Phillips wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, The Skeptic wrote:
John Blake wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:13:01 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
The only answer to the verses Paul mentions in Romans that makes any
sense is that God the Father knew before the creation of the world who
would respond to His Son and who would not. And so at the time of His
Son's death, God placed the sins of only those He foreknew would accept
His Son as their Savior on His Son's shoulders. To believe that God
would save some and damn others simply because that's what He wanted to
do would be to make God out to be even worse than ourselves. Truly, it
would make Him to be even worse than Satan himself. A Christian who
does not mind dutifully serving a god who he knows might have damned the
entire rest of his earthly family has serious mental problems that need
to be examined. There are enough difficult issues in this world that
makes us question God's motives and plans without us also having to
grapple with the issue of whether or not the god we serve is a Nazi
barbarian.
But that is just what you do have to face up to. You admit that God
knew before he created the world that there would be those who did not
believe in his existence, indeed could not believe simply because they
saw his existence as unevidenced. Nevertheless, he went ahead with his
plans regardless of the human suffering he knew it would cause. That
makes him a monster in my book and far worse than any human has ever
been.
John
Why? He creates the world and tells the first man that he communes with
every day "Don't do this." What does the man do? He does exactly what
God told him not to, even though he enjoys God's presence on a daily
basis and has all the proof he needs that God is real.
But god *lied* to him (he ate the fruit but didn't die). How can he
go on believing anything that god tells him?
He didn't? You mean Adam is still alive? And Cain? And Noah?
So man disobeys
and loses his communion with God. Shortly after this man commits his
first murder. By the time of Noah, man has been breeding with angels
I'm unfamiliar with the biblical passage that says that man was
"breeding with angels"--please cite it for me.
Read the opening verses of Genesis Chapter 6. Many people have wondered
if the basis for the Greek and Roman gods were the things described in
those verses.
for so long that the human race, apart from Noah and his family, no
longer even resembles the people God had created.
The same people that disobeyed him, right?
By the time of the flood, the human race had become something of a
hybrid race.
So they are
destroyed. Fast forward to the time of Christ. God has sent His Son on
a mission to pay the price for the sins of men,
Why did god do this? Couldn't god simply forgive man's sins on his
own, without an intermediary? Does god have multiple personalities?
According to God, every sin has its price, and that price is eternal
seperation from Him. But God does not have multiple personalities.
What He does have is both perfect love and perfect holiness. In His
Love, He sent His Son to suffer a terrible fate so that He could forgive
us of our wrongdoings. In His holiness, he felt pleased at the agony
His Son was enduring because it satisfied His demand for justice with
regard to sin. It may seem to us that God should simply just forgive
men of their sins without having to punish someone for what men have
done. But when you consider the lengths that God has gone to to enable
Him to forgive us at all, it becomes rather bold of His creation to
demand even more of Him than He has already given, especially when the
Bible makes it clear that God was under no obligation to save anyone at
all.
and exactly what is it
anyone expects Him to do? Even when He communed with humanity, they
still disobeyed Him. So having proof that He exists so that man might
believe He exists is not exactly what's on His mind. He wants His
people to do more than just believe in Him. Satan and the demons
already believe, but that belief does them no good. He wants his people
to love and obey Him, and that is beyond any man's ability to do on a
consistent basis.
But it's god who made man that way--why should man be punished for
being what god made him?
No. God made man to love and obey him perfectly before he initially
rebelled against God. Man's disobedience changed all that, depriving
him of the ability he'd once had to do what God had originally created
him to be able to do.
God knows this. He also knew who would believe His
Son and what His Son had done for them. He also knows that there were
many many people that would not believe no matter how many chances they
were given or how much evidence might be presented to them.
Imagine a Polynesian fisherman who lived 3,000 years ago. He loved
his wife and children, was kind and thoughtful of others, and never harmed
another person in his life. When he died, where did he go, heaven or hell?
To be honest, I cannot answer this question. There are two schools of
thought. One is that the man will still go to Hell because he hadn't
believed in Christ and therefore was kept out of Heaven by the sins he
had committed. The other school of thought is that the man will at some
point be given the chance to repent and accept Christ as His savior, if
not in this life, then in the next. I personally subscribe to this
latter way of thinking. Paul himself said in Romans that where there is
no law, there is no sin. And where there is no sin, there is no
punishment.
These
people were determined to let other things convince them that it was all
a pack of lies. The only way God could save all men, both those who
wanted to believe and those who did not, would be to force them all to
believe as well as to obey and love him. But that violates one of God's
core characteristics, that being his embrace of free will.
Why do you think that one of god's core characteristics is his
embrace of free will? How is "Believe in me or burn in hell for all
eternity" an exercise of free will?
How is it not? You have the choice of both to believe in Christ or to
deny Him. You also have the choice to live with God forever in Heaven
or to be separated from God forever in Hell. Just because God allows
you free will, that doesn't mean He cancels out the consequences for
every mistake and bad decision we make.
Being made
in God's image, we also have that free will, but we lack the eternal
view of all things that God has. As a result, we are unable to see the
consequences of our decisions, whether good or bad. God can see those
consequences. We cannot.
An oversimplification--I know that hitting an innocent person in the
head with a brick is a bad thing, so I'm aware of the consequences of some
of my actions. And the reason we can't see the consequences of all of our
actions? God. Why didn't god make it physically impossible for one man to
harm another (ex: you get a blinding headache if you try to harm someone)?
Because then we would be relying on our own intellect instead of on
God.
If we could, perhaps we would all be on our
best behavior.
Instead your god decided that threatening all of us with burning in
hell for all eternity was the only way? Your god lacks imagination.
Wouldn't it be nice if we all lived our lives obeying every just law
without question? But since most of us have no such desire to allow us
to do what we truly should on a consistent basis, how are we kept from
recklessly disobeying the laws? The threat of force? Yes?
But it has been chosen for us not to know those things
through our own abilities.
Who made that decision? Your god. Who bears responsibility for
that decision? Your god.
And what is wrong with that? If you'd rather try and trust your own
intellect instead of God's wisdom, He is certainly not going to stop
you. But you will have to face the consequences of all your wrong
choices, and God cannot be blamed for that.
Instead, God has warned man of what those
consequences would be in a general way by telling us that if we step
outside the perimeters he has established for us, then there will be a
price to pay.
Why is burning in hell for all eternity the price for stepping out
of line? Doesn't that seem a tad extreme to you? How could a kind and
loving god even come up with something like that?
When this universe comes to an end and all things are made new, there
can be only two places for man to go. If you do not accept Christ as
your Savior, why should He allow you into Heaven when He sent His Son to
die for you and asked only that you believe in His Son in return? Is it
unfair of God to deny admission into Heaven for someone who rejects His
ultimate act of love and sacrifice? As for burning in Hell, no one can
truly say that Hell is a place of true burning, like existing inside a
volcano. Yes, the Bible talks about a lake of fire, but Jesus uses
different images to describe Hell, such as outer darkness and worms.
But God is merciful even when He allows someone to send himself or
herself to Hell. As I've pointed out before, there are different
degrees of punishment in Hell. So the example you bring up later of a
Buddhist who leads an exemplary life on Earth qualifies for less
punishment in Hell than someone who spends his earthly life killing
other people. However less punishment that Buddhist will qualify for in
Hell, that doesn't alter the fact that even for him the punishment he
does receive will be sufficiently horrible to justify Christ's death on
the cross to save that man from his fate.
Some people will believe that and try to live their lives
to please God, and if they fail, their sins are forgiven if they repent
and ask for forgiveness. Everyone else chooses to disbelieve that there
is a God and to follow their own intellect instead of their Creator's
guidelines.
So someone who commits unspeakable atrocities their whole life can
get into heaven by claiming that they are repentant, but a buddhist who
leads an exemplary life of caring for others burns in hell for all eternity?
Your god is pretty fucked up, friend...
Leading an exemplary life may reduce the punishment that one must endure
in Hell, but it is because one's sins were dealt with on the cross that
no one truly goes to Hell for whatever sins they commit, save one. It
is the sin of denial of the very Person who died for man. Any sin
except for that one can be forgiven. So the Buddhist who leads an
exemplary life gets separated from God for eternity not because of any
of his sins, but because he didn't accept Christ as his Savior. On the
other side of the coin, a man like Hitler could have confessed his sins
and asked for forgiveness and salvation moments before he was shot by
Eva Braun (I know that Hitler supposedly killed himself, but for the
sake of this example, I am assuming she killed him and then took
poison). Thus, Hitler would be in Heaven. Sound horrific? Jesus knew
it would be a difficult concept to understand, which is why he used the
parable of the workers to explain what happens. He said that a boss
needed workers to work for a specific 24-hour period, say December 12.
During the course of that entire day, the boss would continue to hire
people, even just one minute before the day was done and he would no
longer need workers. And everyone who worked for this boss understood
that no matter when he started his work, he would get the same wage as
everyone else. So a man who started at one minute before the end of the
day would get the same paycheck as the man who had started at the start
of the day. The point was that salvation was free to those who had
lived as Christians from the moment they were of the age of
accountibility as well as to those who had lived very corrupt lives
until the moment before their death when they repented and asked for
forgiveness. While that may seem unfair to alot of people, it actually
should be cause for celebration. If Christ's death can allow God to
forgive someone like Adolf Hitler for the things he did, then why should
you worry about whether or not God will forgive you because you've spent
a lifetime of stealing other people's money before you finally decided
to get right with God?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Phillips" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Atheism |
16 Aug 2005 06:47:34 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, The Skeptic wrote:
Jim Phillips wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, The Skeptic wrote:
John Blake wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:13:01 GMT, The Skeptic <Not@dialup.slow> wrote:
The only answer to the verses Paul mentions in Romans that makes any
sense is that God the Father knew before the creation of the world who
would respond to His Son and who would not. And so at the time of His
Son's death, God placed the sins of only those He foreknew would accept
His Son as their Savior on His Son's shoulders. To believe that God
would save some and damn others simply because that's what He wanted to
do would be to make God out to be even worse than ourselves. Truly, it
would make Him to be even worse than Satan himself. A Christian who
does not mind dutifully serving a god who he knows might have damned the
entire rest of his earthly family has serious mental problems that need
to be examined. There are enough difficult issues in this world that
makes us question God's motives and plans without us also having to
grapple with the issue of whether or not the god we serve is a Nazi
barbarian.
But that is just what you do have to face up to. You admit that God
knew before he created the world that there would be those who did not
believe in his existence, indeed could not believe simply because they
saw his existence as unevidenced. Nevertheless, he went ahead with his
plans regardless of the human suffering he knew it would cause. That
makes him a monster in my book and far worse than any human has ever
been.
John
Why? He creates the world and tells the first man that he communes with
every day "Don't do this." What does the man do? He does exactly what
God told him not to, even though he enjoys God's presence on a daily
basis and has all the proof he needs that God is real.
But god *lied* to him (he ate the fruit but didn't die). How can he
go on believing anything that god tells him?
He didn't? You mean Adam is still alive? And Cain? And Noah?
Genesis 2:17:
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:
for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Adam didn't die on the day he ate the fruit, so god lied.
So man disobeys
and loses his communion with God. Shortly after this man commits his
first murder. By the time of Noah, man has been breeding with angels
I'm unfamiliar with the biblical passage that says that man was
"breeding with angels"--please cite it for me.
Read the opening verses of Genesis Chapter 6. Many people have wondered
if the basis for the Greek and Roman gods were the things described in
those verses.
Where does it say that "the sons of god" are angels?
for so long that the human race, apart from Noah and his family, no
longer even resembles the people God had created.
The same people that disobeyed him, right?
By the time of the flood, the human race had become something of a
hybrid race.
Where is this written? Why did you dodge my point that people who
"resemble the people god had created" would be disobedient?
So they are
destroyed. Fast forward to the time of Christ. God has sent His Son on
a mission to pay the price for the sins of men,
Why did god do this? Couldn't god simply forgive man's sins on his
own, without an intermediary? Does god have multiple personalities?
According to God, every sin has its price, and that price is eternal
seperation from Him.
So slaughtering children and wearing a cotton/poly blend are just
as bad to your god? Damn, he's nuts!
But God does not have multiple personalities.
So why did he say "thou shalt not kill" and then encourage
wholesale slaughter?
What He does have is both perfect love and perfect holiness.
I don't see how a being could have "perfect love" and at the same
time allow anyone to burn in hell for all eternity. I guess you and I have
different definitions of "love".
In His
Love, He sent His Son to suffer a terrible fate so that He could forgive
us of our wrongdoings.
So your god enjoys suffering? If not, why didn't he simply forgive
us of our wrongdoings?
In His holiness, he felt pleased at the agony
His Son was enduring because it satisfied His demand for justice with
regard to sin.
Your god is a monster--I'm really glad he doesn't exist.
snip rest of scary nonsense - I can't read the rest of what you wrote after
seeing the above.
--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"Geez, if you're going to get *this* upset whenever I do something stupid,
then I guess I'll just have to stop doing stupid things!"
-- Homer Simpson
.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
