|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Jul 25, 2009 15:46:59 GMT -5
I don't know that God ever killed prostitutes IN SPECIFIC, but considering the vast amount of deaths attributed to him, he likely has. Basically, the point was to link his methods with another killer, as well as to account for that annnoying "he only kills sinners" loophole.
And of course these arguments 'kind of' make sense. It 'kind of' makes sense that the universe, in all of its complexity, would have a designer. But 'kind of' just isn't good enough.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight on Jul 25, 2009 16:55:45 GMT -5
When did god kill prostitutes again? Also this goes to the nature of killing....hold on *twists psyche into a pretzel * For one human to kill another it is murder, but for GOD to kill a man it is the equivalent of a man stepping on an ant. Murder is the killing of your own kind - so killing isn't the bad thing - murder is. The only way for god to commit murder is if he killed another god - but as there are no other gods that would be impossible. We are His creations so He can unmake us if he so chooses, but we are bad if we unmake each other or ourselves. *untwists* or so the logic goes. I get the logic, but I have to point out a flaw in it. We are not "ants" to God, we are supposedly created in his image. Which leads me to another question, one I have touched upon in another thread on this forum: What is the omnipotent, omniscient God's benevolent motivation for creating a flawed world? There can't be a single event in history that was not foreseen by God. In one word: Why?
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Jul 25, 2009 17:00:55 GMT -5
What, you aren't satisfied with, "God works in mysterious ways"? What if I break out the oracle fog & say it in a mysterious, sequal-hook type voice?
And the basic problem with that logic is just that God isn't portrayed as being some kind of cold person who doesn't give a shit if they step on ants. A bigger problem is that we're not talking about someone who just so happens to step on an ant, we're talking about the kid who lights them on fire for amusement.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight on Jul 25, 2009 17:20:46 GMT -5
What, you aren't satisfied with, "God works in mysterious ways"? What if I break out the oracle fog & say it in a mysterious, sequal-hook type voice? No, we are not amused. (Thanks, Queen Victoria.) I'd probably slap your face for trying such a cheap escape. The inconsistensy must be adressed. And the basic problem with that logic is just that God isn't portrayed as being some kind of cold person who doesn't give a shit if they step on ants. A bigger problem is that we're not talking about someone who just so happens to step on an ant, we're talking about the kid who lights them on fire for amusement. Exactly! Even if I did believe in that God, I wouldn't worship him, I'd revolt.
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Jul 25, 2009 17:37:26 GMT -5
When did god kill prostitutes again? Also this goes to the nature of killing....hold on *twists psyche into a pretzel * For one human to kill another it is murder, but for GOD to kill a man it is the equivalent of a man stepping on an ant. Murder is the killing of your own kind - so killing isn't the bad thing - murder is. The only way for god to commit murder is if he killed another god - but as there are no other gods that would be impossible. We are His creations so He can unmake us if he so chooses, but we are bad if we unmake each other or ourselves. *untwists* or so the logic goes. But then, wouldn't that make God impregnating Mary bestiality?
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Jul 25, 2009 22:35:29 GMT -5
Okay, I would like to know how Mr. Mann thinks that what he's doing here is OK, when atheists have been banned for less.
I would also like to know where RR gets its facts on other cultures, beliefs, & lack of beliefs.
Lastly, I would like to know why God let my ice cream melt, for that made me swear revenge on him, & thus sent me down the path of becoming a Satan-worshipping atheist Hell-bent on deconverting or destroying every Christian I came across.
Okay, that last one was a joke.
Or was it?
<_<
>_>
|
|
|
Post by kristine on Jul 26, 2009 1:04:08 GMT -5
...What is the omnipotent, omniscient God's benevolent motivation for creating a flawed world? There can't be a single event in history that was not foreseen by God. In one word: Why? You guys are killing me here....hold on * twists psyche into a pretzel again-blows dust off of old Sunday School memories.* God is perfect and created humanity perfectly (aka Adam and Eve) but no world would be complete without freedom and choices - but the stress of perfection was too much for humans to bare and they chose incorrectly to ignore God (fall from grace) so he distanced Himself from them (us) by letting humanity 'hang ourselves with our own rope' so to speak. We will learn to be more perfect and like God by learning from our own mistakes it's similar to the answers I got from the age old question "can God create a rock he can't lift?" - to which the answer is "yes" while He is creating it, He can't lift it, and then, once He is done with that task He will reorder the universe so he can lift it, and as God does not experience time the same way humans do He is doing what we puny humans perceive as a paradox. But then, wouldn't that make God impregnating Mary bestiality? God can manifest a part of himself as a human...doh... * Cramps...untwists* JUST LIKE ZEUS HAHAHAHAAAHAA!!! * forcibly twists back into fundie pretzel* thereby making Jesus both completely human and divine. Lastly, I would like to know why God let my ice cream melt, for that made me swear revenge on him, & thus sent me down the path of becoming a Satan-worshipping atheist Hell-bent on deconverting or destroying every Christian I came across. God didn't let your ice cream melt- man's sinful creation of ice cream caused it to become less than perfect, and melt before you could eat it. Original sin is melting ice cream all over the world and your revenge is only causing it to melt faster with your bad sinful choices and attitude... *Untwists* whew.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Jul 26, 2009 1:22:53 GMT -5
And you did that without becoming devoured by a bad anime parody. I am impressed.
About the "can God create a rock he can't lift" thing, I keep seeing paradoxical questions like that being trumpeted as the cornerstone of atheist arguments on RR. But...I can't remember seeing that being used to argue a point even ONCE. What I want to know is, where do they get that? And even if it does happen, why not just use something more common, like the Problem of Hell?
Which they sometimes do, but they oversimplify & to make the person sound whiney, as I parodied with the ice cream thing.
|
|
|
Post by kristine on Jul 26, 2009 1:30:58 GMT -5
And you did that without becoming devoured by a bad anime parody. I am impressed. I was inspired by Who Framed Roger Rabbit and The Mask. About the "can God create a rock he can't lift" thing, I keep seeing paradoxical questions like that being trumpeted as the cornerstone of atheist arguments on RR. But...I can't remember seeing that being used to argue a point even ONCE. What I want to know is, where do they get that? And even if it does happen, why not just use something more common, like the Problem of Hell? I argued with university fundies who wanted to show how smart they were and rarely retreated to "God works in mysterious ways" phrases. *shrugs* What exactly is "the Problem of Hell"? Which they sometimes do, but they oversimplify & to make the person sound whiney, as I parodied with the ice cream thing. lol, I thought I responded to the melting ice cream fundie appropriate...
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Jul 26, 2009 2:22:13 GMT -5
You are very adept at Fundie Mimicry.
That said, the Problem of Hell is, simply put, that it makes God a douchebag. The "Problem of Hell" can be summed up with any theological argument pointing out that Hell is contrary to God's nature. Anything from "all you have to do to get there is not believe" to "why would a benevolent God create such a place in the 1st place" is covered under the Problem of Hell.
|
|
|
Post by kristine on Jul 26, 2009 3:11:44 GMT -5
You are very adept at Fundie Mimicry. That said, the Problem of Hell is, simply put, that it makes God a douchebag. The "Problem of Hell" can be summed up with any theological argument pointing out that Hell is contrary to God's nature. Anything from "all you have to do to get there is not believe" to "why would a benevolent God create such a place in the 1st place" is covered under the Problem of Hell. It goes to the same argument that humans (or anyone who ignores God) creates their own problems as He has all the answers, and the more wrong choices and un-bibley things you do, the further away you get from His state of perfection...yadda, yadda, yadda...I'm sure you've heard the drill.
|
|
|
Post by canadian mojo on Jul 26, 2009 7:07:29 GMT -5
God can manifest a part of himself as a human...doh... * Cramps...untwists* JUST LIKE ZEUS HAHAHAHAAAHAA!!! * forcibly twists back into fundie pretzel* thereby making Jesus both completely human and divine. What part would that be? I really want to see the fundie explanation for that; prudishness and virgin birth should really make for an interesting pretzel twist. Additionally, did god only provide half the genetic material?
|
|
|
Post by kristine on Jul 26, 2009 15:25:28 GMT -5
God can manifest a part of himself as a human...doh... * Cramps...untwists* JUST LIKE ZEUS HAHAHAHAAAHAA!!! * forcibly twists back into fundie pretzel* thereby making Jesus both completely human and divine. What part would that be? I really want to see the fundie explanation for that; prudishness and virgin birth should really make for an interesting pretzel twist. Additionally, did god only provide half the genetic material? God does not need any sexual act to create life - it is simply a matter of...ur... *Cramps...untwists*HIS ALMIGHTY DING-A-LING!! IT MANIFESTS AS A HUMAN MALE BUT IS ACCTUALLY JUST ONE BIG DICK AHAHAHAHA...ha... * forcibly twists back into fundie pretzel* ...erk....changing any of the cells in Mary's womb to that of stem cells, altering the genetic code as He sees fit and allowing the baby to grow naturally. Kind of like Parthenogenesis but without all the birth defects. All genetic material is from God so all of Jesus's genetic material could be different from that of Mary as well. Who do you think puts genetic codes in the order they are in besides God?
|
|
|
Post by Vypernight on Jul 26, 2009 16:39:54 GMT -5
Was the term 'virgin' actually used for Mary in the Bible? If all we have to explain Jesus is the term, "Immaculate Conception," then that doesn't mean Mary was a virgin. Immaculate means 'without sin,' not 'without sex.' And procreation isn't a sin. Mary and Joseph were married, so having a baby wasn't a sin at all.
Of course, the two of them may have been into some really kinky S***, and God just figured an angel banging Mary behind a bush was more holy.
Just some thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight on Jul 26, 2009 17:10:00 GMT -5
...What is the omnipotent, omniscient God's benevolent motivation for creating a flawed world? There can't be a single event in history that was not foreseen by God. In one word: Why? You guys are killing me here....hold on * twists psyche into a pretzel again-blows dust off of old Sunday School memories.* God is perfect and created humanity perfectly (aka Adam and Eve) but no world would be complete without freedom and choices - but the stress of perfection was too much for humans to bare and they chose incorrectly to ignore God (fall from grace) so he distanced Himself from them (us) by letting humanity 'hang ourselves with our own rope' so to speak. We will learn to be more perfect and like God by learning from our own mistakes kristine, are you ready for another pretzel? Freedom and choices - that's an important point, and as I see it, it negates the idea of an omniscient god. God, who is outside time and space, must have foreknowledge of anything that happens in his creation, that is, if God is omniscient there is no free will, and certainly not in the question of salvation. God knew from the very beginning who would be saved and who would be lost, which means life on earth is like a screenplay. The actors may not know the manuscript, but the author certainly does, and there's no way the actors can add to or subtract from the play. Freedom is not consistent with omniscience, and I for one see no logical solution to this problem. Do you?
|
|