This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
My Quandry with Judeo-Christian Beliefs
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
DarkOpeth
Proud Atheist here. For your consideration:
The analogy of Russell's teapot argues that the burden of proof for the existence of God lies with the theist rather than the atheist.
The Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit is a counter-argument to the argument from design. The argument from design claims that a complex or ordered structure must be designed. However, a god that is responsible for the creation of a universe would be at least as complicated as the universe that it creates. Therefore, it too must require a designer. And its designer would require a designer also, ad infinitum. The argument for the existence of god is then a logical fallacy with or without the use of special pleading. The Ultimate 747 gambit points out that God does not provide an origin of complexity, it simply assumes that complexity always existed. It also states that design fails to account for complexity, which natural selection can explain.
The omnipotence paradox suggests that the concept of an omnipotent entity is logically contradictory, from considering a question like: "Can God create a rock so big that he cannot lift it?" or "If God is all powerful, could God create a being more powerful than itself?".
The problem of hell is the idea that eternal damnation for actions committed in a finite existence contradicts God's omnibenevolence or omnipresence.
The argument from free will contests the existence of an omniscient god who has free will — or has allotted the same freedom to his creations — by arguing that the two properties are contradictory. According to the argument, if God already knows the future, then humanity is destined to corroborate with his knowledge of the future and not have true free will to deviate from it. Therefore our free will contradicts an omniscient god. Another argument attacks the existence of an omniscient god who has free will directly in arguing that the will of God himself would be bound to follow whatever God foreknows himself doing in eternity future.
I agree with HiVolt. Once I am presented with unbiased, non-anecdotal, empirical evidence as to the existence of a diety(s) I will adjust my beliefs accordingly.
Additionally, while I am certainly no longer a Christian, and when I rejected religion (which was at like age 14, I wasn't very passionate either) the whole "belief as insurance" concept seems somewhat asinine. As far as I know, belief for "insurance" purposes does not equal sincere, open-hearted belief in a deity(s) , and is pretty much intended only for self-salvaition and self gain. That would render such a "faith" not only false, but going exactly against the wishes of the religious teachings. (someone please correct me If I am wrong.)
Also, there is a vent discussion going? I must HAIF info! Someone please tell me directions on how to join, I would dearly like to participate.
Post by
Monday
Also, there is a vent discussion going? I must HAIF info! Someone please tell me directions on how to join, I would dearly like to participate.
Go to Interest's topic on vent.
A question of Vent or something thereabouts.
As far as I know, belief for "insurance" purposes does not equal sincere, open-hearted belief in a deity(s) , and is pretty much intended only for self-salvaition and self gain. That would render such a "faith" not only false, but going exactly against the wishes of the religious teachings. (someone please correct me If I am wrong.)
I agree.
And for the Boeing Gambit. It says that God must have infinite creators, and that rules out the possibility there is one.
But.
Where does all the matter in the universe come from? Does it come from other matter? But where did that come from?
Same thing can be applied. It means that matter must have had a creator, which then rules out the possibility of matter existing.
(That logic was probably some of the weirdest you've ever heard. Cut me some slack, I'm running on fumes here. Really tired.)
Post by
DarkOpeth
Also, there is a vent discussion going? I must HAIF info! Someone please tell me directions on how to join, I would dearly like to participate.
Go to Interest's topic on vent.
A question of Vent or something thereabouts.
As far as I know, belief for "insurance" purposes does not equal sincere, open-hearted belief in a deity(s) , and is pretty much intended only for self-salvaition and self gain. That would render such a "faith" not only false, but going exactly against the wishes of the religious teachings. (someone please correct me If I am wrong.)
I agree.
And for the Boeing Gambit. It says that God must have infinite creators, and that rules out the possibility there is one.
But.
Where does all the matter in the universe come from? Does it come from other matter? But where did that come from?
Same thing can be applied. It means that matter must have had a creator, which then rules out the possibility of matter existing.
(That logic was probably some of the weirdest you've ever heard. Cut me some slack, I'm running on fumes here. Really tired.)
Hmm. I haven't slept in about 36+ hours... so I know what you mean. Yeah some of this logic gets so out of scale and so mind-bendingly grand and convoluted its hard to keep a lid on it all. Certainly much to discuss here.
Also, after about 2 mins of searching, I found the info and got vent all set up. :D Thanks a bunch.
Post by
HiVolt
Correct so the argument atleast should make people question that if God did exist if he is in fact good.
How is it correct? God has a clear reason for holding back against evil.
God has three main qualities most assigned to him: omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence.
In omniscience, he knows evil exists. In omnipresence he has the power to stop evil from happening. And, in omnibenevolence, everything that he does is good. God wishes for evil to be eradicated from our existence, knows of it's presence, and has the power to stop it- but does not act on that wish. I do believe that calls into question how "perfectly good" god could be.
Like I said earlier in the thread, it seems more apathetic than benevolent to me.
It also raises a problem with the idea of hell. In most Christian beliefs, god is both perfectly good and also casts judgment on the souls of the dead. In his judgment he can either allow them entry into heaven- an eternity of paradise- or condemn them to hell- an eternity of suffering. Is it a quality of good that sends the souls of the dead to suffer even more than they may have in life?
I really think a more apt quality than omnibenevolence would be omnijustice to define god(even if my personal convictions lead me to believe that many of the same qualities that call into question the omnibenevolence of god would do the same for omnijustice). In omnibenevolence everything god does is good- when it is rather clear that everything god does or does not do is good(the Old Testament will provide examples of that). However, in omnijustice, not everything god does must be inherently good, merely inherently just.
Post by
Adamsm
It still all comes down to the religion and how they...'view' The One.
Post by
DarkOpeth
God has three main qualities most assigned to him: omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence.
In omniscience, he knows evil exists. In omnipresence he has the power to stop evil from happening. And, in omnibenevolence, everything that he does is good. God wishes for evil to be eradicated from our existence, knows of it's presence, and has the power to stop it- but does not act on that wish. I do believe that calls into question how "perfectly good" god could be.
Exactly. Reminds me of this one quote I read once:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
Also, I would expand upon what you said above, by being omniscient, "god" knows absolutely everything knowable, ever, about any object from something as large as a Universe(s) to something as small as the component parts an individual atom. Apparently Omniscience grants him absolute and unwavering knowledge of the past, present, and most importantly of the future, right down to the last blade of grass in-front of your house.
Okay, lets (for the sake of argument) go with that, and as I stated in an above post, this brings up the problems of: Free Will, the Problem of Hell, etc. Someone answer those, please. Secondly, omnipresence, kind of ties in with with omniscience. (see Omnipotence Paradox, Problem of Free Will)
Omnibenevolence, while for the sake of argument I am willing to (briefly) accept that "god's" reasoning, intelligence, willpower and foresight is infinitely greater than mine, I fail to see how a god that is commonly said to "love all his creations" is showing his "love" to the thousands of (read: Children) that are dying of simple causes such as hunger every day.
I would posit that an all-knowing (omniscient) god aware of all this suffering and doing NOTHING about is either: apathetic (doesn't care) malevolent (ill-intentioned, evil) and there fore lets this happen, or mainly NOT able to do anything about it, making him not omnipotent
The closer one analyzes this "all mighty, all powerful, all knowing" stuff, to more apparent it becomes just as to how completely full of logical holes it is.
Post by
Monday
Who says everyone who does evil goes to Hell?
I would posit that an all-knowing (omniscient) god aware of all this suffering and doing NOTHING about is either: apathetic (doesn't care) malevolent (ill-intentioned, evil) and there fore lets this happen, or mainly NOT able to do anything about it, making him not omnipotent
It isn't that He isn't able and it isn't that He doesn't want to either. He holds himself back to test us, unless called upon in times of need.
I fail to see how a god that is commonly said to "love all his creations" is showing his "love" to the thousands of (read: Children) that are dying of simple causes such as hunger every day.
So what do you want Him to do? Create food for every single person in the world, and thereby show without a doubt He exists and ruining the very purpose of this creation?
Also, I would expand upon what you said above, by being omniscient, "god" knows absolutely everything knowable, ever, about any object from something as large as a Universe(s) to something as small as the component parts an individual atom. Apparently Omniscience grants him absolute and unwavering knowledge of the past, present, and most importantly of the future, right down to the last blade of grass in-front of your house.
The future can change. There are certain events in the future that
will
happen. But otherwise, you have free will and can choose to not aid God.
Myself, I don't think that He has absolute knowledge of the future, because that would imply that it had already come to pass. I believe He has a very good idea about what will happen in the future, but because of free will, it can change.
Post by
DarkOpeth
So what do you want Him to do? Create food for every single person in the world, and thereby show without a doubt He exists and ruining the very purpose of this creation?
If "He" exists, wouldn't you rather live in a world with an active, present "God" where everyone has their basic needs met, or in a world where suffering, misery and death is rampant and "god" is nowhere to be found?
What is the very purpose of this creation?
Myself, I don't think that He has absolute knowledge of the future, because that would imply that it had already come to pass. I believe He has a very good idea about what will happen in the future, but because of free will, it can change.
That's an interesting take on it. Wouldn't that mean that he wouldn;t be all knowing then? Suppose, in the a week's time, Funden goes to the grocery store. You see a bottle of soda. You have a choice. Take the soda and pay for it, or leave the soda be and move on. Would you suppose "god" knows right know (a week beforehand) what you are going to do? Or is he waiting for you to use Free Will and make that choice? What if he already knows what you are going to do, but he is just waiting for to make that choice?
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
What is the very purpose of this creation?
To make sure that you are pure enough to reside with Him. No unclean thing may enter Heaven, so this is a test to decide who is worthy enough to return.
Wouldn't that mean that he wouldn;t be all knowing then?
Depends on how you think time works.
Suppose, in the a week's time, Funden goes to the grocery store. You see a bottle of soda. You have a choice. Take the soda and pay for it, or leave the soda be and move on. Would you suppose "god" knows right know (a week beforehand) what you are going to do? Or is he waiting for you to use Free Will and make that choice? What if he already knows what you are going to do, but he is just waiting for to make that choice?
He probably has an excellent idea of whether I'll get it or not, but it is possible for me to do something out of character.
Also, like I said, depending on how you think time works, it could be that He knows exactly what we will do... but it is our own choice anyways. He knows what we will do because we chose to do it, and He's just essentially watching reruns.
Again, just some food for thought, depending on how you think time works, and showing how an omnipotent being might go about work.
If you were on fire, and I was holding a fire extinguisher and did nothing, would "I was just testing you" be a valid excuse for not helping?
Bad analogy. This whole world is a test, not just life threatening crises.
It's like a school test. The teacher could answer your questions, but he wouldn't, because that wouldn't help you learn, or see how you've improved, no?
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
why doesn't he intervene when the student is bleeding to death from paper cuts inflicted by the school test?
Because it was your own free will to commit suicide?
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
why doesn't he intervene when the student is bleeding to death from paper cuts inflicted by the school test?
Because it was your own free will to commit suicide?
You're inferring information that isn't explicitly stated, there is no intervention regardless of who or what inflicts the wounds.
You never stated that you asked for help.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
Frankly, you're way off. You think that God will come down from heaven and heal you, and, again, reveal His existence to the entire world, ruining the whole purpose of this creation? You think that God will just baby you, so you can blunder off and do whatever the crap you want, because you know in the end that God will come down and miraculously heal you, because He loves you.
No. He does love you, but in the end you have the free will to act... and as such you must accept the consequences. The act is cutting yourself with paper, or taking a test where the paper seems actively trying to murder you, then the consequence is injury and possibly death. He's not just going to remove the consequences of your actions so you'll love him.
There are other ways He helps though. If you suffer any sort of non-instant death condition (such as gunshot wounds, poison, sickness, etc), and ask Him for help,
while
seeking medical treatment, if it is His will, He will help you.
Post by
DarkOpeth
Frankly, you're way off. You think that God will come down from heaven and heal you, and, again, reveal His existence to the entire world, ruining the whole purpose of this creation? You think that God will just baby you, so you can blunder off and do whatever the crap you want, because you know in the end that God will come down and miraculously heal you, because He loves you.
No. He does love you, but in the end you have the free will to act... and as such you must accept the consequences. The act is cutting yourself with paper, or taking a test where the paper seems actively trying to murder you, then the consequence is injury and possibly death. He's not just going to remove the consequences of your actions so you'll love him.
Yeah man, I get your point certainly, but I want to return to the example I used previously, starving children in places like Ghana, Sudan, Niger, Chad, Mali, Eritrea, etc.
They require food to survive. The fact that they need something to feed themselves with and survive isn't about being babied, its about surviving, they aren't off, blundering and doing "whatever they want" and expecting help. All they want is food, and dealing with the "consequence" is death by starvation/malnutrition.
Pretty much all of these kids' suffering has nothing to do with any of their own actions. They are just kids. The reason they are starving is the consequence of their parent's actions, the actions of their failed government, and this world. They did not ask for the situation they have been put in, they are almost always completely innocent. Don't you think THEY are deserving of help?
Post by
Monday
I certainly think they are deserving of help.
But, in the end, God won't solve all your problems. That's the job of well-meaning humans such as myself.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
If life is a test, we don't have the free will not to take it (or if we do via suicide, we get the same punishment as failing the test), so your point about having the free will not to take the metaphorical test is moot.
It was your choice in Heaven to take this test. If you didn't, you'd be in the legions of Satan. Your point is moot.
The stone didn't do anything, the ingredients did and I see no reason to believe the prayer does anything if it only works while seeking medical attention. See also The great prayer experiment which seems to contradict you on a massive scale.
Wrong kind of prayer. They didn't have the restored prayers specially made for healing, and I doubt they were anointed with oil consecrated for the healing of the sick and the afflicted.
Stay with the doctrine. You're using examples that don't affect me at all.
Is god not omnipotent enough to intervene without revealing himself?
You try healing somebody from death of a thousand paper cuts without revealing that a high power exists. He could mess with you so you couldn't see that, but it would take away your free will to witness the event.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.