View Full Version : Christianity?
mulligan
07-05-08, 10:10 AM
Hello everyone. I just wanted to post this thought. I went to PSR for years, was confirmed, the whole 9 yards, as catholic, but none the less I have respect for other demoninations of christianity as well as just about every religion, but I'm really finding christianity really contradicting. Here's why:
According to christianity, God loves his creation correct? So that would mean humans too, wouldn't it? Well when you love something you'll do anything in your power to make it happy, won't you? Well isn't it fair to say that God has the power to intervene in acts on earth? Hasn't he before? That being said why would you allow your creation, who you love infinitely, to sufer at all? Some may say, well so that your creation may know suffering and appreciate joy. Well since you ARE God coudn't you instill in them what suffering is without making them actually experience it? Even then that is clearly not the case as far as what is happening on earth. Every human suffers more than once in its life. No, I don't have statistical evidence to proove it, but I think it can be assumed. That being said, if God is good and loves his creation then why allow it to suffer in some make-shift world, rather than experience complete joy in the original kingdom that was created; FYI, Heaven. How is it love when you ALLOW that which you claim to love, suffer? and of course if there's something I'm missing here and God does exist then I would surely accept him as my master, but for now if people ask me my religion I simply say I don't know what to believe. I'm not saying christianity isn't the true religion, because maybe it is, but I simply don't know. There are just too many contradictory points for me to be so devoted to it. My next point is, once again if you love your creation so much then why do you allow some of it to be completely ignorant of your presence. I assure you there is some human on earth who has NEVER heard of christianity. Wouldn't you want your creation to know who you are so that it may follow you?
suffering is learning, without suffering we don't learn
[QUOTE=draqon;1918739]suffering is learning, without suffering we don't learn[/QUOTE
That is just not so. Positive re-inforcement works better.
mulligan
07-05-08, 10:57 AM
Yea, but it's God we're talking about. He could put into our minds what we need to know without suffering. He has the power to, it's ridiculous to say he doesn't. So if you had the power to wouldn't you make it to where something/someone you loved could learn whatever without first suffering? and besides that I learn new things at school everyday without suffering, so i just don't see how that's an excuse.
Fraggle Rocker
07-05-08, 11:17 AM
According to Christianity, God loves his creation correct? So that would mean humans too, wouldn't it? Well when you love something you'll do anything in your power to make it happy, won't you? Well isn't it fair to say that God has the power to intervene in acts on earth? Hasn't he before? That being said why would you allow your creation, who you love infinitely, to suffer at all?Christians and Muslims--and several other religions--get around this by cheating. They claim that there is an unobservable, untestable, unverifiable supernatural universe larger than the one we actually live in. When the organic matter that comprises the sum total of us dies--or so the fairytale goes--an unobservable, untestable, unverifiable supernatural component of each of us called the "soul" continues to live. That "afterlife" goes on eternally, and the particular afterlife we experience will be a reward or a punishment for the way we lived on earth. That afterlife is infinite, so in comparison to it, the "mere" century or less that we live on earth is absolutely nothing, and the "brief" suffering we endure here is trivial. Moreover, the suffering is important because it builds character. The nasty, angry, petulant, imperious know-it-all god these people believe in would be arrested for child abuse if he walked down the street of any major American city.My next point is, once again if you love your creation so much then why do you allow some of it to be completely ignorant of your presence? I assure you there is some human on earth who has never heard of Christianity. Wouldn't you want your creation to know who you are so that it may follow you?Again, they find a clever way to weasel around this. This god only reveals himself directly to certain people (the various cults of Abrahamism disagree to the point of bloodshed over who that is: Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Joseph Smith, etc.), and it becomes that person's job to enlighten everyone in his community. Once that work is complete, it becomes the job of everyone in that community to enlighten the rest of us. This is all part of the nasty, angry, petulant, imperious know-it-all god's plan, you see. If his chosen people take this job seriously and convert a lot of "heathen" or "infidels" to the one true religion, their "souls" have a much greater chance of going to "heaven" after their bodies die. Again, they disagree to the point of bloodshed over which is the one true religion. And the Jews don't play this game since their cult of Abrahamism is not evangelical; for some reason they never got the commandment from their god that they had to convert their neighbors. It's strictly a Christian-Muslim game to try to win each other over and stamp out the other's religion--and pick up the Jews at the same time.Suffering is learning, without suffering we don't learnSuffering is also punishment, when you believe in a nasty, angry, petulant, imperious know-it-all god. The Jews don't believe in heaven and hell the way the other Abrahamic cults do; they believe that when they die their bodies just lie there and some day in the distant future--like maybe billions of years from now--their god will finally come down and reanimate the corpses. They believe that they are punished during their mortal lifetime for their sins, and also for the sins of their ancestors. Thus their god will continue to harrass them with slavery, destruction of their temple, occupation of their land, diaspora, antisemitism, second-class citizenship, holocausts, and colonial superpowers giving them somebody else's homeland to fight over, because their ancestors broke their covenant with him and they have to find a way to fix it.
The Christians believe that their god took an anger management class two thousand years ago and in atonement sent the First Hippie to earth preaching love, tolerance and forgiveness--at least to other Christians. Light-skinned Christians. Light-skinned male Christians. Light-skinned, male... oh never mind, the whole thing is just disgusting.
mulligan
07-05-08, 01:34 PM
Well I underrstand the whole concept of what you get is determined on what you do as you live, but if you love your creation then why test them and allow them to damn themselves? How is that beneficial? Why would you test those you love when you already kknow the answer? What good is free will if it will only allow you to damn yourself? It just doesn't make sense if God actually love you, for him to test you and allow you to completely screw yourself over.
Well I underrstand the whole concept of what you get is determined on what you do as you live, but if you love your creation then why test them and allow them to damn themselves? How is that beneficial? Why would you test those you love when you already kknow the answer? What good is free will if it will only allow you to damn yourself? It just doesn't make sense if God actually love you, for him to test you and allow you to completely screw yourself over.
You have to understand what true love means...true love is not granting every wish the creation has...true love is letting the free will of the creation to chose the right path based on their own decisions guided by faith of God.
Suffering is a lesson...punishment is a lesson...life is a lesson, some learn and master life...some are afraid and have no faith in God/themselves.
It is our free-will that is the reason to our own pleasures and sufferings...if God were to give us pleasure only...we would not have free-will, we would not be able to choose "the Adam's apple".
madanthonywayne
07-05-08, 01:46 PM
Yea, but it's God we're talking about. He could put into our minds what we need to know without suffering. He has the power to, it's ridiculous to say he doesn't. So if you had the power to wouldn't you make it to where something/someone you loved could learn whatever without first suffering? and besides that I learn new things at school everyday without suffering, so i just don't see how that's an excuse.Would you rather be a robot that's always happy, or a living, breating human who can experihence pleasure and pain? You can't have free will while at the same time eliminate all suffering.
If you believe in God, especially the Christian God, you refer to him as the father. When you were a child, did your parents ever do anything that seemed designed to make you suffer needlessly yet, in retrospect, you now see was for your own good?
Would you consider a parent who lets their child eat whatever they want (candy), go to school only when they want to (never), and never asks them to do any chores to be a good parent or a bad one?
From the child's perspective, making him go to school, eat vegetables, and do chores is increasing his suffering. Yet from our broader perspective as adults, we know it's for the best.
Isn't it possible that what seems like incomprehensible cruelty from our perspective, is actually for the best from God's?
Well I underrstand the whole concept of what you get is determined on what you do as you live, but if you love your creation then why test them and allow them to damn themselves? How is that beneficial? Why would you test those you love when you already kknow the answer? What good is free will if it will only allow you to damn yourself? It just doesn't make sense if God actually love you, for him to test you and allow you to completely screw yourself over.
If you have read some of the foregoing ,you should realize by now that it is all nonsense.
Would you rather be a robot that's always happy, or a living, breating human who can experihence pleasure and pain? You can't have free will while at the same time eliminate all suffering.
If you believe in God, especially the Christian God, you refer to him as the father. When you were a child, did your parents ever do anything that seemed designed to make you suffer needlessly yet, in retrospect, you now see was for your own good?
Would you consider a parent who lets their child eat whatever they want (candy), go to school only when they want to (never), and never asks them to do any chores to be a good parent or a bad one?
From the child's perspective, making him go to school, eat vegetables, and do chores is increasing his suffering. Yet from our broader perspective as adults, we know it's for the best.
Isn't it possible that what seems like incomprehensible cruelty from our perspective, is actually for the best from God's?
What a silly, irrelevant argument you put forward. By your own token, people who go to heaven will become robots because they will be eternally happy.
I suspect you have been contaminated by Leibniz's " Best of All Possible Worlds". The cure ? Read Voltaire's "Candide".
madanthonywayne
07-05-08, 06:10 PM
What a silly, irrelevant argument you put forward. By your own token, people who go to heaven will become robots because they will be eternally happy.I'm cognizant of the implications regarding heaven, but I was speaking of this world, not the next. I lack the data/experience to speak on mattters having to do with the afterlife. But I can't imagine any form or level of existance in which humans (if they were still fully human) would always be happy.
[QUOTE=madanthonywayne;1919146]I'm cognizant of the implications regarding heaven, but I was speaking of this world, not the next. I lack the data/experience to speak on mattters having to do with the afterlife. But I can't imagine any form or level of existance in which humans (if they were still fully human) would always be happy.[/QU
I take your point but the question is really why a putative loving god could not have arranged things on earth as he is said to have done in heaven. IOW why inflict suffering, much of it on the innocent? What does someone suffering from a terminal illness learn about happiness other than the pain of its absence ? And what about those African babies dying of aids ? What do they know of happiness ?
The question which needs to be answered is why god, for those who believe in him, made suffering a prelude to happiness in heaven, not to mention the pains of hell that some believe in.
madanthonywayne
07-05-08, 10:39 PM
I take your point but the question is really why a putative loving god could not have arranged things on earth as he is said to have done in heaven. IOW why inflict suffering, much of it on the innocent? What does someone suffering from a terminal illness learn about happiness other than the pain of its absence ? And what about those African babies dying of aids ? What do they know of happiness ?
The question which needs to be answered is why god, for those who believe in him, made suffering a prelude to happiness in heaven, not to mention the pains of hell that some believe in.
I can only assume that in order for mankind to have the freewill necesary to mature as moral beings, God has to give up a certain levei of control.
Alternatively, perhaps disease and sickness serve some greater purpose.
I guess both of these explanations assume God, by choice or necesity, operates under certain constraints. That, as a practical matter, he is not really omnipotent. Or, perhaps, he simply chooses not to be.
dixonmassey
07-06-08, 12:38 AM
You can't have free will while at the same time eliminate all suffering.
You can't have free will while worshiping omniscient God, that's for sure. There is plenty of space for free will without suffering. But, for all practical purposes, you will never prove that you are not a robot. You can't be 100% sure that you are not a robot, no matter your faith coordinates. It's just beyond your abilities to ascertain.
I can only assume that in order for mankind to have the freewill necesary to mature as moral beings, God has to give up a certain levei of control.
Alternatively, perhaps disease and sickness serve some greater purpose.
I guess both of these explanations assume God, by choice or necesity, operates under certain constraints. That, as a practical matter, he is not really omnipotent. Or, perhaps, he simply chooses not to be.
Or perhaps no such entity exists. The lack of objective evidence supports this view and makes your assumptions unnecessary.
madanthonywayne
07-06-08, 03:15 AM
Or perhaps no such entity exists. The lack of objective evidence supports this view and makes your assumptions unnecessary.
You can go that way, but I've always found Pascal's Wager pretty convincing.
If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation).
It's really the only argument on either side of the debate that makes sense.
James R
07-06-08, 03:35 AM
madanthonywayne:
Would you rather be a robot that's always happy, or a living, breating human who can experihence pleasure and pain? You can't have free will while at the same time eliminate all suffering.
But a lot of suffering has nothing to do with the exercise of human free will. People are constantly being killed in earthquakes and other natural disasters, or suffer greatly from such. They can hardly be held responsible for those - they have nothing to do with human free will. It seems we must put down such occurrences to the acts of a malicious and uncaring god.
If you believe in God, especially the Christian God, you refer to him as the father. When you were a child, did your parents ever do anything that seemed designed to make you suffer needlessly yet, in retrospect, you now see was for your own good?
You don't teach somebody a lesson by creating a worm that bores through his eyeball, or by wiping out his entire family in an earthquake. Certainly, he can have done nothing to deserve such ill treatment.
Isn't it possible that what seems like incomprehensible cruelty from our perspective, is actually for the best from God's?
What good do you see in an earthquake that wipes out 100,000 people? Explain.
You can go that way, but I've always found Pascal's Wager pretty convincing.
If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation).
It's really the only argument on either side of the debate that makes sense.
When I first read Pascal's Pensees. I regarded him as a moral coward; I still do.
Maybe we should all behave as if unicorns existed; we have nothing to lose and who knows... ?
dixonmassey
07-06-08, 09:09 AM
Pascal wager may help one to secure eternal life IF you'll guess the right kind of God/denomination to worship. There are thousands of those. For some weird reasons all the Gods humans created throughout ages are pissed off by people worshiping wrong kind of Gods much more than by nonbelievers. For example, You shall have no other gods before Me . You see nothing is said about nonbelief. It's obvious that nonbelief in the eyes of Gods is a lesser crime than wrong kind of worship. What are your chances to guess the right kind of God (not speaking of denomination) to wager upon? You see, Pascal wager demands nonbelief as the safest bet.
mulligan
07-06-08, 11:15 AM
first of all, I don't even want to here God compared to the teachings of our parents. Parents have an excuse to allow us to make mistakes so we'll learn because sometimes they have no other way for us to learn. God has no excuse. He has the power to make his creation know something without actually having to suffer. How was Adam able to walk, breathe, etc.? Because God willed him to. There are no stories that say," Oh well Adam first had to suffer before he learned to walk." No, there's nothing like that. But people are now asking if I'd rather be a happy robot in heaven. Here's your answer: Every single one of you are already robots because you can only do what god made you able to. Every thought that crosses your mind, every feeling, everything was enabled by him. If you're trying to say he didn't enable something, then you're saying that humans can manipulate god's will. So now he's not all-powerful, which means now he can be conquered by humans. Which means now christianity is disprooven. So I don't want to hear out of anyone hear that humans can manipulate god's will. The second answer to the questio of would I rather be a happy robot in heaven: Here's the thing, ssnce you're already a robot you're programmed to say whatever herre on earth, whther it be yes or no. So you're already a robot, now would you rather be a robot that can be only happy? or would you rather be able to suffer? If you WANT to suffer then you're an idiot. That completely ccntradicts laws of nature. What motivates living things? Happiness OR the ability to live. Neither of which can be acheieved through suffering. and next people may try to say that happiness is achieved through suffering. Well you're forgetting how powerful god is and that he could make you happy without suffering.
So if you don't want to be a happy robot in heaven you need to realize:
You're already a robot
So now you need to pick between suffering/happiness or happiness alone. Which once again you're an idiot if you'dd pick suffering/happiness over pure happiness.
mulligan
07-06-08, 11:25 AM
( A further explanation of why Parents enabling kids to suffer for the good of them makes sense but god enabling ALL humans to suffer at least once doesn't)
I understand why parents would make their kids suffer for their own benefit. They make them eat vegetables because it's good for their body. They make them go to school to get an education. So how does God sitting back and not intervening in a baby being burned alive benefit the baby that it happened to? Because it gets to go to heaven? Well there are innocent babies that have died deaths that were much more not as cruel (to say at the least) so why did one baby have to be burned alive and the other simply die in its sleep? Espicily when, since they're babies, neither of them were capable of sin so how could one deserve a much more painful death than the other? Unless of course there's something to do with reincarnation, which would disproove christianity.
( A further explanation of why Parents enabling kids to suffer for the good of them makes sense but god enabling ALL humans to suffer at least once doesn't)
I understand why parents would make their kids suffer for their own benefit. They make them eat vegetables because it's good for their body. They make them go to school to get an education. So how does God sitting back and not intervening in a baby being burned alive benefit the baby that it happened to? Because it gets to go to heaven? Well there are innocent babies that have died deaths that were much more not as cruel (to say at the least) so why did one baby have to be burned alive and the other simply die in its sleep? Espicily when, since they're babies, neither of them were capable of sin so how could one deserve a much more painful death than the other? Unless of course there's something to do with reincarnation, which would disproove christianity.
It is your parents who are at fault in the first place. They are the ones who passed on the nonsense they themselves were indoctrinated as children. So, rather than starting from your parents position on religion, start from a neutral position of questioning the claims of reincarnation, heaven and other such fairy tales theists claim.
Suffering is part of life and it has a physical and emotional purpose. You need to specify if you mean emotional suffering, physical suffering or the combination.
mulligan
07-06-08, 02:12 PM
Suffering is suffering. it hurts, it's undesireable. It really doesn't matter what form it comes in. I can see you arguing suffering has a purpose if none of the abrahamic religions were true (christianity, Islam, Judaism), but when you have the power to intervene in something without huge negative consequences to yourself, and you don't, then you're at least partially to blame for what happened. And God being what he's claimed to be, I can't see him having huge negative consequences for sparing an innocent baby from being burned alive. So therefore he shares the most responsibility for what happened. True it's the human's fault who did it to to the baby, but I'm sure that human didn't give itself it's own emotions. Someone had to be there to create that human and allow certain emotions/impulses/feelings/etc. and who else would it be, but God? it couldn't be the parents because although they physically create the human they don't neccessarily dictate how that human feels. They don't put a microchip in its head and control what it does. Once that human matures into an dult, the parents are very limited as to what that human does. and who's to say the parents could control that human from doing what it did to that baby? I know someone that actually DID have the power to intervene.....and didn't......and for that reason an innocent who couldn't even speak or comprehend what good or evil was, was charred into ashes. and if that person actually didn't have the power to intervene then it's not all powerful. So then it can be conquered. So then it's not God.
and (Q), I'm not trying to be mean, but I really don't even see the point of you saying what you said in your last post, where you quoted what I said.
No.
All suffering is not equal.
What is the purpose?
Scenario A:
Go w\out drinking water for a day or two and then put a big glass of ice cold water in front of you and drink.
Scenario B:
Drink water any time you want, just keep drinking whenever you feel like it.
Is there a difference?
Yes.
Mulligan, I really dont know what is so hard to understand. Women suffer during childbirth.
madanthonywayne
07-06-08, 02:40 PM
When I first read Pascal's Pensees. I regarded him as a moral coward; I still do.
Maybe we should all behave as if unicorns existed; we have nothing to lose and who knows... ?
First of all, your unicorn metaphore is absurd. A more apt comparison might be UFO's. Or better yet, Santa Claus (see the top strip):
http://woodside.blogs.com/cosmologycuriosity/images/2007/06/05/calvin_hobbes_pascals_wager_pascal_.jpg
Not to mention Mulligan that suffering offers a unique incite into life. For example if you suffer and willingly live amongst the poor you see how special these people are. Possibly things become even more real, unencumbered by material possessions but more in tune with what it means to be alive.
and (Q), I'm not trying to be mean, but I really don't even see the point of you saying what you said in your last post, where you quoted what I said.
Seems you were talking about your parents and coming to terms with Christianity, yes?
That is the reason why you're a Christian, because of your parents indoctrination from their parents and so on...
So, stop thinking in terms of a Christian if you want to deal with Christianity.
mulligan
07-06-08, 06:07 PM
Did you not notice how I said I understand the point of suffering from a non-religious point of view? If no abrahamic religion is true then i see wh suffering happens. Better yet if no religion is true where there's a God and he has the ability to make his creation not suffer, but doesn't, then I understand suffering. my point is when there's an all ppwerful god what's the point of making his creation suffer to see something when he could simply use his power to make them see something? For example I can learn how horrible the great depression was by reading books about it and talking to those who experienced it. I don't have to go through a great depression to know what it was or how horrible it was. So why would God use suffering as a tool to teach when there are clearly other non-cruel ways to do so? That is, why would you hurt something you love when you really don't have to?
scorpius
07-06-08, 06:30 PM
Did you not notice how I said I understand the point of suffering from a non-religious point of view? If no abrahamic religion is true then i see wh suffering happens. Better yet if no religion is true where there's a God and he has the ability to make his creation not suffer, but doesn't, then I understand suffering. my point is when there's an all ppwerful god what's the point of making his creation suffer to see something when he could simply use his power to make them see something? For example I can learn how horrible the great depression was by reading books about it and talking to those who experienced it. I don't have to go through a great depression to know what it was or how horrible it was.
So why would God use suffering as a tool to teach when there are clearly other non-cruel ways to do so? That is, why would you hurt something you love when you really don't have to?
he wouldnt,..
IF he was Loving,,
unecesary suffering only proves xian god doesnt exist or doesnt care.
and what about the nonsense about sacrificing His son to correct some SIN which He created Himself in the first place?
couldnt he create people With Free will and UNABLE to sin also.
its all bunch of stupid mythology that might have worked on the primitives back then,today peoples brains are evolved enough to see right thru that krap!
http://www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/vindicate.html
Mulligan,
What age bracket do you fall into:
12-18
18-30
30+
You are asking a question that leads me to believe 12-18. It is a common question for someone who is idealistic but uit is not an accurate representation of humanity.
Take a look at a segment of your OP:
God loves his creation correct? So that would mean humans too, wouldn't it? Well when you love something you'll do anything in your power to make it happy, won't you? Well isn't it fair to say that God has the power to intervene in acts on earth? Hasn't he before? That being said why would you allow your creation, who you love infinitely, to sufer at all?
You use the term intervene and ask does God love his creation but what you seem to be focusing on is suffering at the hands of other humans.
Haven't you heard of the term "free will"? it is integral to human existence.
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=free%20will
Do you believe in the notion of "equal and opposite"?
One day you work hard and the next day you go to the beach.
Pain and pleasure........:shrug:
I am not posting for or against the existence of an entity with the powers you outlined in your OP just that the line of reasoning you are alluding to is a dead end.
EndLightEnd
07-06-08, 07:21 PM
Suffering exists because choice exists, no god needed. The good news is we can choose not to suffer, but it has to be done on a global scale.
I see this as a better option then waiting for a God to do it for us, and hell its probably the freakin point.
mulligan
07-06-08, 07:55 PM
Why does my age matter? What if I'm 10? 20? 30? 40? It really doesn't matter. More than likely, you're simply trying to undermine my argument by trying to say I'm either too young or too old and senile to understand something which leads me to believe that you're all out of a reasonable counter-argument to mine.
I realize that in the world there are opposites. As you said suffering and pleasure. I also realize that muchhof the suffering in this world is indeed man made. Well I have three points then:
1. Even if some evil is man made then God is still partially to blame. He has the ability to intervene. He has the ability to without severe negative consequences. Therefore he's somewhat responsible.
2. Not all evil is man made. What about tornados and volcano eruptions? You can't blame that on man no matter what your argument is because natural disasters happen on other planets where there are NO humans! So don't even try to tell me all evil is man made. What are you going to try to say next? That it's natures fault? Well here's the thing, unlike humans, nature (wind, water, fire, etc.) doesn't have free will! So how can you say somethings evil when it doesn't have free will, like humans? You try to blame suffering on the free will of humans when God gave it to us. When did humans ASK for free will? I'd take eternal happiness over suffering( or what you like to call,"free will") any day! Who wouldn't? What good is free will when it only damns you? So whether you like it or not, not all evil is man made. Even if Adam or Eve had asked for free will and knew they were going to suffer, I still know I never ASKED for free will. I'd much rather be a brain washed and happy than have free will and be able to damn myself.
3. What then about babies who die from natural disasters? Was that their parents fault when their parents honestly didn't think that natural disaster would happen?
So what's your sad excuse of an argument now that I've prooven that not all evil is man made and that innocents can suffer from something that wasn't an evil made by man?
The fact still remains that if God is real, that he sits in his paradise, in his kingdom, while humanity suffers, sometimes by things that they can't control. Seriously, saying God isn't responsible for suffering on Earth is like this situation:
There's a man of extreme power and stature. He has highly developed muscles and is more than capable of holding his own in a fist fight. He can control himself and if threatened would manage not to severely hurt someone. He's walking on a trail and sees a woman jogging and suddenly a man jumps out of the bushes and tackles her. He robs her and rapes her. The man does nothing. He doesn't don't stop the criminal who he's clearly more powerful than, he doesn't stop the woman from facing trauma for the rest of her life, he doesn't even call the police. When questioned for his lack of a response he says," :shrug:That man had free will and that evil was man made. I wanted her to know happiness."
dixonmassey
07-06-08, 11:10 PM
Suffering exists because choice exists, no god needed.
Yup, people choose cancer or earthquakes or wars, list is endless.
Humans are tremendously constrained by the societies/circumstances/classes/races etc. they live under. To speak about multitude of choices under these circumstances is to delude yourself.
dixonmassey
07-06-08, 11:24 PM
You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe. (unknown)
It's pointless to argue with believers they have a need to believe, common sense be damned. Why people have tremendous need to believe is another question. I have the need to believe too, but I think that believing in man made Gods will certainly insult supreme entities, if they indeed exist.
It's common sense, that man made Gods are made in an image of man and are plain evil and morally disgusting. One needs to brainwash himself into zombie state to see good and love in the places where only evil exists.
EndLightEnd
07-07-08, 01:06 AM
Yup, people choose cancer or earthquakes or wars, list is endless.
Um yes we do choose wars. And youll find many cancer patients are very happy, because they choose not to suffer, they enjoy what little they have while they have it. And physical pain is NOT the same as suffering, we cannot choose pain, only how to deal with it.
dixonmassey
07-07-08, 02:54 AM
Um yes we do choose wars. And youll find many cancer patients are very happy, because they choose not to suffer, they enjoy what little they have while they have it. And physical pain is NOT the same as suffering, we cannot choose pain, only how to deal with it.
"We" don't choose wars. "We" doesn't exist as a collective selector of choices. Minuscule % of "elite" is involved in war decision making. After a decision is made, in the case of a serious war, drafting Motherland will knock on your door. And you'll have basically two options - to be shot/imprisoned as a deserter/dodger/traitor or take your chances on surviving battlefield. Essentially, those are two basic choices modern humans have a) to follow narrow set of options offered by the "system" (like infantry or navy, for example), b) to be crushed.
What about country to be attacked? I guess they should have behaved differently. However, in cases of wars of conquest&extermination, behavior o a weaker side simply doesn't matter. They are guilty by the fact of their existence.
In most of the cancer cases, pain is too great to enjoy that little what have left. Besides, observing your own disfiguring is painful in itself. To get a grasp, next time you'll get toothache, forget about dentists, go out and enjoy a beautiful sunset.
I didn't separate physical and emotional suffering. Frequently, emotional suffering forces people to infict phisical suffering/death upon themselves. And what's the main reason of emotional suffering? Yup, "nobody gives a dime" is reason number one. And ubiquitous indifference is not something coming from human rottenness. It's absolutely natural, that's how that omniloving thing organized life. To survive with minimum of "comfort" or just to survive, one got to be indifferent. Beast or man.
If no abrahamic religion is true then i see wh suffering happens. So why would God use suffering as a tool to teach when there are clearly other non-cruel ways to do so?
You've answered your own question. Nice work. :)
EndLightEnd
07-07-08, 01:14 PM
"We" don't choose wars. "We" doesn't exist as a collective selector of choices. Minuscule % of "elite" is involved in war decision making. After a decision is made, in the case of a serious war, drafting Motherland will knock on your door. And you'll have basically two options - to be shot/imprisoned as a deserter/dodger/traitor or take your chances on surviving battlefield. Essentially, those are two basic choices modern humans have a) to follow narrow set of options offered by the "system" (like infantry or navy, for example), b) to be crushed.
This is classic victim consciousness, assuming theres nothing WE (normal people) can do about it because the elite run everything! So lets just sit back and take it up the butt! What people dont realize is that normal people can change things but they have to be united (which of course we ARENT because of religious sects, extremists, etc...)
What about country to be attacked? I guess they should have behaved differently. However, in cases of wars of conquest&extermination, behavior o a weaker side simply doesn't matter. They are guilty by the fact of their existence.
Guilty by existence? What?
In most of the cancer cases, pain is too great to enjoy that little what have left. Besides, observing your own disfiguring is painful in itself. To get a grasp, next time you'll get toothache, forget about dentists, go out and enjoy a beautiful sunset.
Sorry but I know many cancer patients, one of my buddies infact just graduated with aerospace engineering degree. He had overcome cancer at a young age and he is as full as life now as he was then. You dont appreciate life until youve almost died it seems. Ive tried to learn from him.
And what's the main reason of emotional suffering? Yup, "nobody gives a dime" is reason number one. And ubiquitous indifference is not something coming from human rottenness. It's absolutely natural, that's how that omniloving thing organized life. To survive with minimum of "comfort" or just to survive, one got to be indifferent. Beast or man.
Well thats what SOME people are trying to change at least. Shifting from this "its all about me" paradigm to "its all about US" (the world). I suggest you randomly help someone today, im sure you will feel better afterwards.
For those of you who actually want to some serious discussion on this, read The Problem of Pain by C. S. Lewis.
In short, the original post makes an incorrect assumption about God. God's goal, as far as our development is concerned, is not 'happiness' but 'holiness'. God wants man (and women) to be like Him.
Mankind's main difficulty in dealing with God and God's will is that mankind is a defective creature; defective by our rebellion against God - commonly referred to as 'the Fall'.
One thing pain does to the individual is to completely destroy the illusion of self-sufficiency. All the pretense of being a totally aloof creature and fully independent of anything else is completely gone with sufficient pain.
Again, The Problem of Pain by C. S. Lewis.
Yes, this picture of a "Loving God" is wrong. It is as Archie said, this God does not want you to be happy, only holy. According to the myth, he created us in his image. It does not explain why exactly he did this, but he needs us, apparently, to be like him.
If love was his motivation, then he would not punish us for exorcising our free will. I mean, it really isn't free will, is it? If it was truly free, we wouldn't go to hell if we used it to find some other means to happiness other that God.
So stop believing that this god you worship is loving. It isn't.
JDawg, you really have a burr under your blanket about God, don't you?
PM me if you want to talk about it.
JDawg, you really have a burr under your blanket about God, don't you?
PM me if you want to talk about it.
No, I'm just not that gullible. See, I have never required a binky when confronted with the possibility of life ending with the death of the physical body. We all have our moments of weakness, when the death of a loved one makes us hope that there is some sort of afterlife, but the Abrahamic God is such an evil bastard, I have no use for him.
And don't bother trying to convert me. I'm not retarded.
mulligan
07-07-08, 09:52 PM
So God doesn't love his creation? Ok let's assume his goal is for us to be holy instead of happy. Well then why aren't we holy. Isn't what God wants, done? He wanted to creeate the universe and so he did in a relatively short time ( a week). So if he WANTED man to be holy then why isn't it? and ," well he wanted man to become holy by itself" OR "he wanted man to choose to be holy", is no excuse. If he wanted us to accomplish it by ourselves then why did he make it so difficult? Does it make him happy to see man toil and lose again and again? Why would he want man to lose continually, to be demoralized continually, and some men never actually become holy if in reality he realy does want them to be holy. When you want someone to do something you don't set barriers in front of them and make it impossible to achieve ( as it's impossible for some men to become holy) and deliberately piss them off because then what happens? they quit out of frustration.
In conclusion God wants man to be holy and yet he allows it to be impossible for some to? That makes no sense, so I'm not buying your pathetic argument that he WANTS man to be holy.
Mulligan, who are you talking to? I don't believe in God, I'm just calling it like I see it.
And the truth is, dude, that the only conclusions you can come to are 1) That God is a total douchebag that is so vain that he created us just to worship him, and would allow some of us to burn in hell for eternity for not doing so, or 2) That this God wants his people to obey him for some bigger reason, which is pretty fucked up, considering that he didn't have to put us through this if he really didn't want us to.
So either way, God is a dick.
So either way, God is a dick.
And he made us in his image :eek:
It explains a lot..
Why does my age matter? What if I'm 10? 20? 30? 40? It really doesn't matter. More than likely, you're simply trying to undermine my argument by trying to say I'm either too young or too old and senile to understand something which leads me to believe that you're all out of a reasonable counter-argument to mine.
I realize that in the world there are opposites. As you said suffering and pleasure. I also realize that muchhof the suffering in this world is indeed man made. Well I have three points then:
1. Even if some evil is man made then God is still partially to blame. He has the ability to intervene. He has the ability to without severe negative consequences. Therefore he's somewhat responsible.
2. Not all evil is man made. What about tornados and volcano eruptions? You can't blame that on man no matter what your argument is because natural disasters happen on other planets where there are NO humans! So don't even try to tell me all evil is man made. What are you going to try to say next? That it's natures fault? Well here's the thing, unlike humans, nature (wind, water, fire, etc.) doesn't have free will! So how can you say somethings evil when it doesn't have free will, like humans? You try to blame suffering on the free will of humans when God gave it to us. When did humans ASK for free will? I'd take eternal happiness over suffering( or what you like to call,"free will") any day! Who wouldn't? What good is free will when it only damns you? So whether you like it or not, not all evil is man made. Even if Adam or Eve had asked for free will and knew they were going to suffer, I still know I never ASKED for free will. I'd much rather be a brain washed and happy than have free will and be able to damn myself.
3. What then about babies who die from natural disasters? Was that their parents fault when their parents honestly didn't think that natural disaster would happen?
So what's your sad excuse of an argument now that I've prooven that not all evil is man made and that innocents can suffer from something that wasn't an evil made by man?
The fact still remains that if God is real, that he sits in his paradise, in his kingdom, while humanity suffers, sometimes by things that they can't control. Seriously, saying God isn't responsible for suffering on Earth is like this situation:
There's a man of extreme power and stature. He has highly developed muscles and is more than capable of holding his own in a fist fight. He can control himself and if threatened would manage not to severely hurt someone. He's walking on a trail and sees a woman jogging and suddenly a man jumps out of the bushes and tackles her. He robs her and rapes her. The man does nothing. He doesn't don't stop the criminal who he's clearly more powerful than, he doesn't stop the woman from facing trauma for the rest of her life, he doesn't even call the police. When questioned for his lack of a response he says," :shrug:That man had free will and that evil was man made. I wanted her to know happiness."
Age has a lot to do with it. First of all if you dont believe in God then why do you keep using the term Evil?
So what's your sad excuse of an argument now that I've prooven that not all evil is man made and that innocents can suffer from something that wasn't an evil made by man?
This is a scvience forum and you are asking about earth quakes and hurricanes...come on Mulligan.
Yea Mulligan, try again.. :D LOL
sorry...
What are you talking about?
What are you talking about?
Just joking.
You know what a mulligan is, right ? ;)
mul·li·gan
2. Golf. a shot not counted against the score, permitted in unofficial play to a player whose previous shot was poor.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mulligan
ha ha, yeah i know. i was joking too.
In short, the original post makes an incorrect assumption about God.
The details of fairy tales are sketchy, at best. It's nice to know you're here to straighten it all out for us. :rolleyes:
mulligan
07-08-08, 08:11 PM
Once again your inability to combat my argument is reflected by your attack on my user name and other irrelevant details that have nothing to do with the argument at hand.
mulligan
07-08-08, 08:14 PM
This is a scvience forum and you are asking about earth quakes and hurricanes...come on Mulligan.[/QUOTE]
Your inability to come up with a successful argument is reflected AGAIN. My argument was that christianity can't exist and yet you're attacking the smallest of details in my argument which accomplishes nothing accept allowing people to know you're beaten.
I am sorry i even responded to your thread. I didnt mean for this to be emotional experience.
Once again your inability to combat my argument is reflected by your attack on my user name and other irrelevant details that have nothing to do with the argument at hand.
I did that.. and it wasn't an attack on your user name, it was just a little joke.
To be honest, I don't even know what your argument is.
mulligan
07-09-08, 10:43 AM
then leave
and who are you talking to?
dixonmassey
07-09-08, 09:48 PM
This is classic victim consciousness, assuming theres nothing WE (normal people) can do about it because the elite run everything! So lets just sit back and take it up the butt! What people dont realize is that normal people can change things but they have to be united (which of course we ARENT because of religious sects, extremists, etc...)
Progressive bull spoken by a person who never lived on a street run by a racketeering gang, for example. There are thousands of people living on that street, yet a gang controls every business, it settles most of arguments&disputes, a gang member may kill you just because. A gang is rarely more than 30-50 fighters strong. Yet thousands of people submit to 50. Why? The answer is obvious. People are atomized and everybody is scared for his life. Everybody knows that it's not 1000 people against 50, it's YOU alone and 50 gansters. And that's human natural instinct - to adapt like a rat to everything instead of taking chances and die. Survival instinct.
Sorry but I know many cancer patients, one of my buddies infact just graduated with aerospace engineering degree. He had overcome cancer at a young age and he is as full as life now as he was then. You dont appreciate life until youve almost died it seems. Ive tried to learn from him.
There are all kinds of cancers. The ones that will kill ya, will hurt you to the point of madness first.
Well thats what SOME people are trying to change at least. Shifting from this "its all about me" paradigm to "its all about US" (the world). I suggest you randomly help someone today, im sure you will feel better afterwards I see more human misery than an average person. I do give $ to whomever asks or, if a person look particularly miserable, I offer money/food/etc. unasked. However, the second thing after I gave are not patting myself on the back. The second thing is a thought - yes, I gave little bit of money, but $5-10-20 will not save a guy, and I will not jump over myself, I will not sacrifice most or even significant portion of my $ to help the guy out, because I'm not suicidal yet.
dixonmassey
07-09-08, 09:59 PM
Christian Jesus is NOT about love, as many wrongly assume. Jesus is all about TOTAL obedience. Actually, Jesus-like person without that living God thing is more of a control freak than anything else. Just strip Jesus of all those Godly clothes, just see Jesus as a man, you'd hate the guy like that.
EndLightEnd
07-12-08, 08:59 AM
Progressive bull spoken by a person who never lived on a street run by a racketeering gang.
And you have? How did you break free from this inescapable situation if its impossible?
And no, I did not grow up with gangs on my front door, but I didnt grow up rich either.
For you to dismiss my "progressive bull" so easily says alot about yourself.
Christian Jesus is NOT about love, as many wrongly assume. Jesus is all about TOTAL obedience. Actually, Jesus-like person without that living God thing is more of a control freak than anything else. Just strip Jesus of all those Godly clothes, just see Jesus as a man, you'd hate the guy like that.
Theists have been indoctrinated in much the same way little children are 'indoctrinated' by their parents.
This is a necessary and very beneficial trait children have; the ability to trust authority figures on their word.
This also helps create the intimate relationship between children and their parents (love).
Religion just parasitizes on this ability..
Theists have been indoctrinated in much the same way little children are 'indoctrinated' by their parents.
This is a necessary and very beneficial trait children have; the ability to trust authority figures on their word.
This also helps create the intimate relationship between children and their parents (love).
Religion just parasitizes on this ability..
You are in denial. 99.99% of society is indoctrinated. Meet your maker when you die, is what they say. Meet your master when you are alive. Mold your mind, shape it like clay, shape it to there agreement. But you gotta play the game, you got to play the game. The own yourgggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
:bugeye:
:wtf:
Where did that come from?
Although i laugh on the outside, on the onside i weep. Heart bleeding, bleeding, bleeding, bleeding.
Well i got to go. Life is for the living, my grandma used to say. I will go now and live it.
You are in denial. 99.99% of society is indoctrinated. Meet your maker when you die, is what they say. Meet your master when you are alive. Mold your mind, shape it like clay, shape it to there agreement. But you gotta play the game, you got to play the game. The own yourgggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
:bugeye:
:wtf:
Where did that come from?
I am aware of that, but it's besides the point.
I'm just saying that children are vulnerable to indoctrination because it's in their nature to accept authority. That's a good thing when it's about not walking into a ditch, but it's not so good when it's religion.
So God doesn't love his creation? Ok let's assume his goal is for us to be holy instead of happy. Well then why aren't we holy.Because we choose not to be. Left to our own devices, humanity always does the short-sighted and self-serving act and then blames it on something or someone else.Isn't what God wants, done?In the short run, no. In the long run, yes.He wanted to creeate the universe and so he did in a relatively short time ( a week).So your argument and bias depends upon a literal and narrow reading of the English translation known as the "King James Version" of the Bible, does it? Have you ever done any reading in a Hebrew transliteration text? Just curious.So if he WANTED man to be holy then why isn't it?In other words, God must choose and do things exactly as you would do or He's wrong? By what authority do you make such a claim?... and ," well he wanted man to become holy by itself" OR "he wanted man to choose to be holy", is no excuse.Aha. You really don't care about the reality, do you? This is just an excuse to blame God for your lack of satisfaction in your own life, right?... so I'm not buying your pathetic argument that he WANTS man to be holy.Bingo!
You simply want a scapegoat for your lack of purpose and sense of accomplishment. You're in lots of good company Mulligan. People have been whining about this sort of thing since Cain. Enjoy your misery, Mulligan.
Because we choose not to be. Left to our own devices, humanity always does the short-sighted and self-serving act and then blames it on something or someone else.
Since the world has been ruled by theists for centuries, using theist decision-making processes with theist mindsets, we can conclude the your example is from theist doctrine.
In other words, God must choose and do things exactly as you would do or He's wrong? By what authority do you make such a claim?
By exactly the same authority you make religious claims.
You simply want a scapegoat for your lack of purpose and sense of accomplishment. You're in lots of good company Mulligan. People have been whining about this sort of thing since Cain. Enjoy your misery, Mulligan.
Or, take responsibility for your actions instead of whining.
mulligan
07-19-08, 02:38 AM
"Because we choose not to be. "
ummm NO. I, MYSELF, NEVER chose not to be. God never put ME ina garden and let me make my own choice. He punished ME for something my great ancestors did.
"In other words, God must choose and do things exactly as you would do or He's wrong?"
He's wrong when he has the power to stop evil and doesn't. For the record he's a fucking hypocrite. He wants man to do good and yet he made the devil stronger than man. That makes NO sense.
"By what authority do you make such a claim?"
Through the mind that GOD gave me and allowed me to use
"Aha. You really don't care about the reality, do you? This is just an excuse to blame God for your lack of satisfaction in your own life, right?Bingo!"
No, my life really isn't that bad. I would even go as far to say that it's pretty good. Here's the thing: I actually care about others and find it funny how when humans don't act to stop evil they're held responsible for their actions, but when God who also has the power to stop it doesn't, he's not held accountable for his actions.
"You simply want a scapegoat for your lack of purpose and sense of accomplishment. You're in lots of good company Mulligan. People have been whining about this sort of thing since Cain. Enjoy your misery, Mulligan.[/QUOTE]"
No, you use Adam and Eve's mistake that God ALLOWED them to make as an excuse for your suffering instead of tracing it back to the very source from whence it came.
Oh no it couldn't be God who allowed evil! Not my God who allowed the holocaust to happen and allow babies to be burned alive! No it just couldn't be his fault, it was Adam and Eve's! Humans who never asked for free will and who God knew would fail if he gave them it! No it just couldn't be God's fault!
...wow....
That God is no better than someone who threatens to push you into an eternal furnace if you don't do as they say.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.