God is a Moron

God said that if you eat the fruit, you will surely die. God put the choice for us to do evil, but evil had not entered. Evil is rebellion against God. Rebellion is disobedience to an authority. There was no evil until Adam disobeyed. That act was evil, and thus was born evil from our action, not God's. In this sense, I'm not sure if the fruit itself was evil at all. In performing the action they learned what it meant to be evil (which is rebellion against God). Then God cursed all parties involved, thus ending man's paradise until the second coming.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

My mind and logic tell me that the chances of no God are > 99% <100%. My experiences of God make me have hope. With my life defying the odds, I look back and can see there was a guiding force bringing me to God. So, I have faith because I have got this far through impossibilities, all the while towards God. God was faithful to me, even when I didn't have faith in him. It's like you know that that candy bar is not good for you, but you indulge anyway.

Belief in God is irrational behavior based upon experiences that involve the five senses, as well as emotion. It is as logical as dancing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I know God is like nature, but if there really was a loving God, I wish he hadn't created the world or the garden of Eden, or us, or the tree of knowledge, because I didn't want to eat the fruit. But there is no loving God, there is just nature.

if i would have been god I wouldn't have created the tree of knowledge or the fruits or humans.

i don't want the ability to choose. god why didn't you let me choose if i want to have the free will to choose? why didn't you let me choose if i want to choose? i don't want free will. i want to be like a stone, or like a tree. unconscious. peace.

therefore there is no god.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I will pose a question and give you the answer, so you can better understand your god.
could you have a two way conversation with a one year old child, or a chimpanzee, a dog, or even a lion?
no of course not, for they have no understanding of good or evil, or much else for that matter.
therefore they could not understand what god said or what the implication would be, he could just as easy said stop picking your nose, it had about as much meaning.

explain how adam and eve could do evil without having any knowledge of good or evil.

exactly, thay would not of known of evil before they ate of the fruit

how is that possible if they had no knowledge of good or evil, only god would know it was evil as he wanted it that way.

thus was born evil from gods actions, not ours.
it's a very simple logic, quite easy to grasp.

exactly, your getting it, learned being the operative word.

explain how this could be, if they had no knowledge of good and evil before thay ate the fruit. ie no good thoughts or no bad thoughts, they could not do bad deeds or good deeds before thay ate of the fruit, could they.
therefore the only conclusion you can make is, there could not be any original sin, so god must of wanted evil in the world.

 

?

I confused, I thought you believed in god, I quote "tell me that the chances of no God are (more than)> 99% (less then)<100%". exactly what I said.

good for you.

you got this far because of your own strength's, have more believe in yourself.

you were the only real person faithful to you.

thats a definite.

not possible, a god is a subjective thought, (supernatural/spiritual,) as such cannot interact with any of the five senses, it only takes one instant of a thing to prove it exists.

how, dancing can be down in reality with a real person.
it's can only be illogical, as your dancing with an imaginary friend.

 

The one thing I know is that a story was and is told of a man named Jesus Christ. It was said that he performed miracles and that he was the only way to an afterlife. Fact or fiction, I would rather believe in everything the Jesus said and find out that I was wrong, than to not believe in Jesus Christ and find out that I was wrong. What is truth anway? Every truth is temporary with science and logic. The day Columbus crossed the ocean without falling off the edge, man's truth about the world changed. Then, the world was round. Science says there is no God. In the end, what is the truth?

When we Christians argue about God's existence and the meaning of the scriptures, we limit God. We attempt to explain the unexplainable. Who would want a God that we could figure out, examine, label, and measure? What would we be if we could scientifically prove God's existence? Would we not be God's ourselves?

God's truth is evident for those that irrationally hope that there is purpose behind the choatic nature of the world because they seem to work together more than apart. What is random and a scientific mystery is proof of the living God, as cheesy as it sounds. Our personal truths are biased toward ideas and experiences we gather throughout this life, so everyone follows something. Whether it's Isaac Asimov, Thomas Eddison, Albert Einstien, or Jesus Christ. We all follow the beliefs of someone else. No truth is the truth permanently with science. At this point, no one can scientifically prove the existence or the non-existence of God. Evidence points both ways, but it is all circumstantial.

As for me, a life of complete rationality is a dull one. If everything was explainable, life might be easier, but the wonder of it all would be dead. Remember, if there is a God, we can choose to believe or not, but God is anyway.

 

jayleew: The one thing I know is that a story was and is told of a man named Jesus Christ. It was said that he performed miracles and that he was the only way to an afterlife.
*************
M*W: You're correct. It is just a "story." In that "story," the main character named "Jesus" did many wonderous feats that the other fictional "characters" were said to have witnessed and then wrote about their own stories. In the end, the "hero" saves the day. This is a very common theme in literature.
*************
jayleew: Fact or fiction, I would rather believe in everything the Jesus said and find out that I was wrong, than to not believe in Jesus Christ and find out that I was wrong.
*************
M*W: The character "Jesus" never wrote anything. None of the stories ever written about "Jesus" indicated that he wrote anything as even part of the main story. I would rather believe that everything Mark Twain wrote was factual, than to find out I was wrong and his literary heroes were just fictional.
*************
jayleew: What is truth anway? Every truth is temporary with science and logic. The day Columbus crossed the ocean without falling off the edge, man's truth about the world changed. Then, the world was round. Science says there is no God. In the end, what is the truth?
*************
M*W: There is no god.
*************
jayleew: When we Christians argue about God's existence and the meaning of the scriptures, we limit God. We attempt to explain the unexplainable. Who would want a God that we could figure out, examine, label, and measure? What would we be if we could scientifically prove God's existence? Would we not be God's ourselves?
*************
M*W: I didn't think Christians argued "about God's existence" or the "meaning of the scriptures." This is new news. Sorry, but the unexplainable in ancient times is readily explainable today. What ancient man believed to be a higher power than himself, today we can figure it out, examine, measure and label it. Ancient humans saw themselves as powerless. I've said this a zillion times already, but once again, they feared the elements, because the elements were out of their control. Today we call it the science of meteorology. Early man feared and awed the sun, moons, stars and planets which were out of his intellectual reach. Today, we have the science of astronomy. We don't fear the sky gods anymore. With the development of the science of aeronautical engineering, we now go there.
*************
jayleew: God's truth is evident for those that irrationally hope that there is purpose behind the choatic nature of the world because they seem to work together more than apart. What is random and a scientific mystery is proof of the living God, as cheesy as it sounds. Our personal truths are biased toward ideas and experiences we gather throughout this life, so everyone follows something. Whether it's Isaac Asimov, Thomas Eddison, Albert Einstien, or Jesus Christ. We all follow the beliefs of someone else. No truth is the truth permanently with science. At this point, no one can scientifically prove the existence or the non-existence of God. Evidence points both ways, but it is all circumstantial.
*************
M*W: Our personal truths are biased, as you stated, but not just through the experiences we gather throughout "this life." Our personal truths are based on millions of years of genetic and cellular memories. Even modern man still has the fear and awe of the sun and solar system in his genes. That was the mother of invention that sent us into outer space. Science cannot prove what "IS." Science can only prove what "ISN'T." Therefore, science will never be able to prove the existence of God. Science is only able to prove that there is no God.
*************
jayleew: As for me, a life of complete rationality is a dull one. If everything was explainable, life might be easier, but the wonder of it all would be dead. Remember, if there is a God, we can choose to believe or not, but God is anyway.
*************
M*W: The rationality of the scientifically explainable would not be boring at all! There still remains a whole universe out there that we don't know. As modern humans, we should accept what science has given us and learn to believe in what "IS" and stop believing in what "ISN'T."

 

It's not just literature. It's also an explanation of life. From the beginning to the end. In literature and movies, we subconsciously express this truth.

What do you expect to find? The universe is the same everywhere.

You don't know what is and isn't.

 

Really? You've been everywhere?

The same would undoubtely apply to you, so why make a statement implying knowledge of the entire universe?

 

That's probably one of the few christian arguements that make even a hint of sense.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Not really. But I haven't been everywhere on earth either. Yet I know that wherever I go here, I find the same pattern: fire, air, water, earth. This pattern repeats in the rest of the universe also. The laws of nature don't change.

 

no it's not sensible, it's just pascal's wager.
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/pascal.html
http://www.godchecker.com/

 

Yes, but what if we, thinking that Armageddon is going to happen anyway, let our planet be detroyed (through global warming or nuclear war), only to leave a few survivors who repeat the whole cycle again over the next 10-15,000 years, ad infinitum? What if there are no survivors and no god? Well, maybe the baboons will survive and do a better job of ruling this planet than we ever have.

 

Exactly! Now you understand! Let the older races, our revered and honored ancestors, the Baboon, rule the planet in our stead! It'll be a lot better! Except that it'll smell of bananas constantly, but hey, that's a problem we live with now...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Not bad! That geocities guy (Paul Tobin) has done some real thinking. He makes some great points I never thought of. He has what seems as a convincing argument against Pascal's Wager, but with a lot of reason comes a lot of fallacies.

One of the biggest problems I have with his argument is that it is difficult to label a person as Christian. His definition of a Christian is very ambiguous, which makes it very difficult to say who is actually a Christian. Who can honestly create the definition of a Christian anyhow? I mean, by definition, I am not a Christian and neither was David (in the Old Testament). Because David and I screw up and are at times anything but a Christian. But, I believe in Christ, and I seek his heart, and I know what the scriptures say for those who do as I do. But, I cannot say if I will be eternally punished or not, but I have hope and I have promises. Is the term "Christian" socially bestowed, or personally? Is it not easier to say you are a Christian than to give your life for something you believe?

Furthermore, even if it were possible to peer into everyone's heart and see "black and white" who was and who wasn't a Christian, it is circumstanicial evidence that blames Christians for the immoral and ecological problems today. What were the circumstances? Was there chemical influence involved? Was there blackmail? Was there social pressure? What made a person, who was labelled as a Christian, perform immoral acts? Does someone who we can say is a Christian still retain the label after committing the act?

The correct circumstances can make a hero out of a killer and vice versa.

I do have to concede that religion, be it Christian, or not can be dangerous in the wrong mind. If I ever prove myself to be religious to someone, then I will have to stop and think about what I am doing.

 

Just drop-kick the god that created hell back into his hell and you might just die laughing.

Don't piss your life away kissing ass -- kick butt and laugh till it kills you.

This lethal-laughter the Hindus call Kundalini that Christians corrupt to call their Holy Spirit.
-- just words

 

Whose God are you referring to? Our ( http://www.theoldway.org or http://www.theoldway.tk ) God is not all knowing and is not all powerful.

 

Most athiest are out-siders looking for attention when otherwise they would not get it.
Dont feed the athiest.

 

You are no smarter in todays times than our ancestors were in thier times.

 

What a load of old donkey cock.

Although I generally try and avoid flaming, you truly are a halfwit.