This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden rule.

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Greatest I am, Nov 27, 2016.

  1. Greatest I am Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,740
    This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden rule.

    God kills when he could just as easily cure. This is irrefutable.
    This is a clear violation of the golden rule. The golden rule as articulated by Jesus.
    God then is clearly evil.
    Do you agree with Jesus that anyone who breaks the golden rule is evil?

    Regards
    DL
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,383
    Maybe Jesus was lying?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,094
    What's ironic about your op (which is a good question) is that regardless of a god, either this universe is evil or life and this universe together by its nature produces evil. You dont even have to believe in god to realize the problem of evil.

    This is also because god can be defined in so many ways and is also different to each person. To some god is merely love, so if that is god amid the evil or enemy, then god is good etc.

    To me, the laws of nature is evil and we have to try and be humane as possible despite this inherent flaw. Its like realizing your parents and rules or way of life or house you grew up in wasnt the best or werent right but you had to deal with it as best as you can.

    Its like that saying that says to change what you can and deal with or in some cases accept what you cant change. And so we have to do that under these laws of the universe, nature, god or whatever you call it.
     
    Jan Ardena likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,223
    Not that I'm advocating for god or anything, but this makes some false assumptions:

    The Golden Rule applies to humans.

    Anyone does not include God.


    It seems kind of silly when you play it out:
    I am God. I am omnipotent, yet somwhow I must follow a rule.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    But hey...
    I should do unto humans as I would have humans do unto me?
    If I kill a human, can the human kill me? God?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,277
    I can't change folk saying the scriptures are not made up using the ingredients of superstition and ignorance and I am sure I will never accept that for them to ignore the obvious should be somehow considered reasonable.

    I do feel sorry for folk who have grown up in a situation where their ability to think critically was destroyed at an early age and left with no tools other than superstition and ignorance with which they must face life and manage the guilt ingrained via such method of indoctrination.

    Their childhood indoctrination often will have kept the truth hidden from them and they go to the grave having lived their life on a monstrous lie.

    I wish I could change the indoctrination of children who are helpless to the hideous programing of ignorance and superstition leaving them guilt filled and forever confused.

    Alex
     
    Greatest I am likes this.
  9. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,094
    Yes, but he is saying if thats the case, god is an asshole or therefore evil by that definition. Just because its a god or has more power or not accountable does not mean its nature, actions or lack thereof are meaningless or moot. Actually if god is omnipotent and omniscient, its accountable as in at fault for everything because it has all the power.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2016
    Greatest I am likes this.
  10. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,475
    Does God kill? You say it is irrefutable (which suggests that it is also irrefutable that God actually exists, which is surely the subject of another thread?) but on what basis do you assert this?

    Further, why is God good or evil? Can't good and evil simply be a conscious subjective perspective of the environment / actions rather than anything inherent?
    And why is the golden rule the only yardstick by which you would judge someone good or evil? Do you see no times when going against the golden rule would be seen as non-evil?
     
  11. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,094
    The premise is if a god does exist in the traditionally known definition as omnipotent, omniscient and 'consciously' created all this, therefore its evil. If its not conscious, then it cant be labeled as evil because consciousness denotes intent and awareness. The traditional definition of god is believed to be aware and so therefore those who worship such a definition of god are by extension corrupt themselves or immoral.

    Of course, technically going against the golden rule is treating others the way you want to be treated in some contexts etc. As an example, if you buy someone a gift you consider what they would like not exactly what you would and vice versa. He means the general understanding of the golden rule which requires some empathy and sympathy as well as respecting your boundaries/self as well as theirs and vice versa. Its basically considering others well-being besides just yourself especially interacting or that your actions are not exploitive or damaging.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2016
    Greatest I am likes this.
  12. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,475
    I am aware of what the premise is, and also what the Gooden Rule is.
    My point is that the OP firstly assumes that God is either good or evil, and omits the possibility of God being simply neutral, with good and evil being but our human perspectives rather than anything inherent.
    Secondly, it assumes that God breaks the Golden rule, and states this as being irrefutable... I would like to see/hear the argument for this rather than accept a simple assertion.
    As a neutral, God might simply give us the sandbox in which to play. Is it evil because it allows pain and suffering when it could prevent it? Are all humans evil because they don't stop all suffering in the world for all animals? Do you protect all the animals you can, stop predators from eating, only eat vegetables yourself? No? Oh, you evil person.
    Do you think a soldier is evil because it shoots to kill rather than looks for peaceful resolution?
    Is a parent who punishes their child to be considered evil?

    And I genuinely struggle to understand your viewpoint that "the laws of nature is evil". Perhaps you can expand on this? To me the laws are simply unconscious relationships between things. They are neither evil nor good. They are dumb, mute, blind, and senseless to such subjective matters.
     
  13. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,189
    I think this is the law of the prophets, not God.
    However, if it has to be a rule, it must be for those of us who need reminding.

    jan.
     
  14. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,094
    A sandbox where people can exploit, torture, dominate, enslave and kill eachother is not leaning towards evil? A sandbox where there is competition for resources to the point life lives at the expense of another's life is just so good and peachy? For whom?

    No, the analogy would be more akin to a prison yard. No, we dont save all animals or others because we can't. If a conscious god created this, then life is not so important to it but more rather an amusement at our expense.

    As for the universe, i will concede that it may not be consciously evil but is rather inferior when it comes to housing life in its care. If a babysitter or parent or nurse or doctor had this type of record, they would be judged appropriately. We dont judge god because deep down we know we are bound to this sandbox and cant make god accountable not necessarily because it is right, good or perfect.

    And where you are faced with those parameters where certain things can never be changed, it is a practical and emotional waste of time but more productive to be positive and work with or around it. This further cements itself to the point the concept of god is unquestionable authority because for all practical purposes is. Then later we become so adapted or adjusted to our lot, we start to think god is perfect, neutral or good when all around us is flagrant examples it isnt considering its omnipotence. Basically, it is more painful and harmful to face the evil we cant control rather than to accept it so we deal with the evil we can control somewhat which is eachother and leave god or universe out of such judgements.

    This is just a purely hypothetical conjecture as far as what god or universe is as well as if its conscious or consciously and intentionally created knowing life exists here and also if god is omnipotent.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2016
  15. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,475
    The sandbox merely doesn't restrain. Why is that evil? Is the allowing of freewill evil? I would agree that the sandbox contains the capability for evil in as much as it contains the capability for good. But the sandbox is itself no more good or evil than a grain of sand.
    You have a rather bleak and depressing perspective. Fortunately it is not one I share, not because it is bleak and depressing but because i simply see dumb neutrality.
    You seem to be assuming that the universe was given life to take care of... again not something I agree with.
    How does being bound to the sandbox mean you can't judge the one who binds you?
    I agree that it's pointless struggling against that which you can't control, but the rest... not a mindset about God I recognise or can fully comprehend, I'm afraid.
    And assumes God exists.
    The universe, though, I consider neutral, with no fudiciary care for us, no requirement to look after us; it simply exists, and we simply exist within it for as long as we do.
     
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,794
    No, it's not. The golden rule is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." How do you know what God (or whatever the image you have of what God is) would want one over the other? Sounds like you are trying to apply human concepts to a non-human entity, which doesn't make much sense.
     
  17. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,094
    The premise is if god consciously created such. It doesnt have to have human characteristics or thoughts or desires to be evil.

    A psychotic sociopath may be very different than the next guy but doesnt mean the golden rule doesnt apply. I can use the golden rule in how i treat my pets too, a different species.

    This whole premise is on the belief a god whose intention was our existence and creation.

    Even without this god, life in this universe has got some serious problems and flaws which cant be denied but its just the way the cookie crumbles.
     
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,794
    But it does have to be human if you wish to ascribe human wants and desires to it - which is what the Golden Rule is predicated upon.

    Would it make sense to ascribe the Golden Rule to a forest, for example? Does the Golden Rule allow you to cut down a tree? Does it allow you to let a forest fire burn thousands of trees? Do such questions even make sense when applied to a non-human entity like a forest? And forests are a lot more like us than any version of God is.
     
  19. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,277
    The golden rule is this...
    If you have the gold you get to makes the rules.
    Alex
     
  20. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,094
    Okay, fine but it still either goes back to the op's point that either a conjectural god is evil or doesnt give much a crap either intentionally or by its nature that cant relate. And neither does the universe. And either way, we are stuck with the problem of evil with or without the concept of god BUT what the op's deeper point or exercise is that those who continue consciously to worship or emulate a flawed concept of god is not improving matters. We have the ability and some choice in the matter to effect and can perpetuate what does not have to be because of a fallacious belief it does or there is no other way when there can be a better way, choice or alternative. In other words, those who dont question or recognize the obvious corruption or hypocrisy of authority are more apt to increase such by default.

    Another aspect is the idea that god's nature is inherent in life or its creation so therefore the evil that one manifests is a reflection of god just as maybe the good but thats also another debate as we are talking duality or two contrary elements forced together thus the god/devil dichotomy. This is also what the op is alluding to i reckon. But all in all the op is in the general ballpark because life in this universe is inherently predatorial and if by design then a god is evil.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2016
    Greatest I am likes this.
  21. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,475
    Why do you see predation as evil, or if by design then the result of evil?
     
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,794
    The bolded part of your reply is the important part, I think. If there's an entity out there that simply cannot relate to our existence (i.e. it is as different from us as we are from a forest) then it's not evil that drives its actions, but simply an inability to relate to us. (Or relating to us at a higher level than we can comprehend.)
    Every concept we have of anything (God, justice, democracy etc) is flawed. Some work to improve those flawed concepts; that's great. They are improving matters.
    Agreed there. Understanding all parts of a system - good and bad - is key to improving it.
    So predation=evil? All predators in the wild are evil? Lions? Bears? Dolphins? Eagles? Tuna?
     
  23. Great Old One Registered Member

    Messages:
    88
    Jesus is claimed to be both fully human and fully God by the Christians. So, when God tortures and kills more readily than He could easily heal it might seem somewhat hypocritical of Him.

    However, He claimed as the most important commandment:

    "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind."

    Love thy neighbor as self comes second.

    In this way, it appears God might escape your indictment on a technicality. He isn't tasked to love you as much as He loves Himself. It's rather your job to love Him first and then love everybody else as much as you love your own self. If God doesn't express His love of you as much as you wanted while you rot and die from cancer in your last days then that really isn't His problem.

    God has another escape route here from a charge of hypocrisy.

    Maybe He hates Himself.

    After all, we are all created in His own image and He kills every last one of us at some point. So when you're treated horribly you can take comfort in knowing it's exactly what God wants to happen. He's treating you just as He wants to be treated Himself. When He made His star appearance here on Earth his favorite thing to do was to become crucified.

    He just hates Himself..and you too.

    Whether or not you feel like this would be particularly evil in nature is representation-incorporating.
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.

Share This Page