Random theological stuff - moved from Q about God

[Quantum Foam]

I would argue that assuming there is a God, if he has a particular set of laws, or, rules by which to conduct yourselves so that everything works for the best, that by not following those laws, we as humans bring about the "natural disasters".Because who follows any of the different faiths set of rules as a group? There might be a person here or there, but by a large majority, even the main group of followers of any particular faith really don't abide by the actual precepts set forth by it's holy book.

Humans are not capable of bringing about a hurricane. They may do something that angers a deity who sends a hurricane as punishment, but the key is the deity is the one who kills through the hurricane. It is not done through the free will of a human. If I punch you, and then you punch me, I did not bring about the punch in the sense of causing it. I merely angered you and then you decided to punch me, which you didn't have to do. Same thing with the death penalty as exercised by the state. A murderer does not bring about his own death by the state because the state does not have to murder the murderer to punish them. Life imprisonment is an obvious alternative, or maybe something less severe yet still potent.

Anyway, just because you don't follow all the precepts doesn't mean you should have death brought to you. So let's say divorce is prohibited in the new testament. So it's o.k. for god to send a tornado and kill the divorced person and destory their house? Talk about morally absurd, but I understand that is the kind of thing you tend to get in various religions. I think all religions that exist are morally atrocious. I think John Stuart Mill put it best, especially in relation to Christianity.

 

[Einherjar86]

Well, there are a few things to distinguish here. For example, natural disasters and diseases are not based on free will, so one could make what to me is a convincing argument that a good god would either intervene to stop these things or would create the laws of nature in such a way that would be radically different where such intervening would not be necessary.

But do most people believe natural disasters to be "evil?" I understand the tragedy of loss and pain that is suffered, but I think that most people understand it's irrational to call a natural disaster "evil." If they're not evil, then God has no reason to intervene.

As for acts caused by free will, a lot of religious people assume free will exists whereas there are various philosophical interpretations of free will and to what extent it exists if at all. Even some religious interpretations of predestination seem to imply we don't really have free will. But assuming we do have free will of some type, if you are going to use the argument that god should not intervene then why not use the argument that i should not intervene to help someone? For example, if i see a woman being raped in a dark ally, should i not help her because that would interfere with the ability of the rapist to exercise his will? I think most people would say that if you can help the woman, help her. Now God can give us free will to think about raping someone and even try to initiate the act of rape, but the difference is god will not intervene to stop the rape. Not only one rape will god not stop, but in no discernable way has god stopped one rape in the history of the world. Unless you hold a Divine Command Theory of Morality, I don't think this can be justified.

This is an interesting argument, but I think it's fair to say that we can't know a god's true intentions. If God created us with free will, then perhaps it's not His responsibility to prevent rapes. I'm not saying that He enjoys watching them happen; but maybe the burden is on us to take action, and whether or not we attempt to prevent a crime is testament to our true nature.

The possibilities could be endless; there are an infinite number of reasons why God might choose to be a silent observer. I'm not a religious person necessarily, but I understand that, logically, there are problems with the idea of "God" that escape rational thought.

As for being affected by laws of logic, some theists hold that god transcends logic, others hold that god is within the laws of logic. It also kind of depends on what definition of god one uses, as I think some definitions are less illogical then others. As for the laws of physics if god exists it might be bound by other laws of physics in another dimension which would obviously limit its omnipotence, but based on what atheist philosophers have written, the concept of omnipotence doesn't seem to make as much sense as theists want it to make.

Omnipotence is a logical problem because if a being can do all things and knows all things, then it stands to reason that it knows its own future; therefore, if it knows its own future, it has no free will, and thus is not omnipotent.

I'm of the opinion that logic and reason can't describe a being such as the Christian God. It transcends logic.

 

[Quantum Foam]

But do most people believe natural disasters to be "evil?" I understand the tragedy of loss and pain that is suffered, but I think that most people understand it's irrational to call a natural disaster "evil." If they're not evil, then God has no reason to intervene.



This is an interesting argument, but I think it's fair to say that we can't know a god's true intentions. If God created us with free will, then perhaps it's not His responsibility to prevent rapes. I'm not saying that He enjoys watching them happen; but maybe the burden is on us to take action, and whether or not we attempt to prevent a crime is testament to our true nature.

The possibilities could be endless; there are an infinite number of reasons why God might choose to be a silent observer. I'm not a religious person necessarily, but I understand that, logically, there are problems with the idea of "God" that escape rational thought.



Omnipotence is a logical problem because if a being can do all things and knows all things, then it stands to reason that it knows its own future; therefore, if it knows its own future, it has no free will, and thus is not omnipotent.

I'm of the opinion that logic and reason can't describe a being such as the Christian God. It transcends logic.

It's not irrational to call natural disasters evil if there is a god. If there is no god it would be irrational because you couldn't blame anyone who either caused it or had the power to stop it and allowed it to happen. God either caused it or allowed it to happen with the power to stop it, hence it is evil from the viewpoint of unnecessarily increasing human death and suffering. Unless there are aliens to blame, but that's just speculation.

And why is it not god's responsibility to stop a rape? Because god says so? Assuming god has free will and assuming god is good, and someone is being raped, and no one else is around to help the woman, but god could help and chooses not to, god is evil. If someone else is around but for one reason or another doesn't help, but god could help and chooses not to, god is evil. To understand this last sentence better, imagine you and I see a woman being raped. Now I look at you and wait for you to help her and when you don't I say "well, it's not my responsibility since you are here too." Sounds ridiculous, huh? As for testament to true nature, it is a testament to god's true nature that if it exists it is an immoral son of a bitch based on the cruel nature of the reality we inhabit.

There might be different reasons why god remains silent assuming it exists, but these are not necessarily good reasons. Every reason I've ever come across i find to be only a testament to how unable people are to face the brutal nature of reality.

 

[Dak]

Just because things aren't punished or stopped now doesn't mean things won't be taken care of in their proper time.

Personally I think that it is kind of "prideful" of someone to suggest that humans get to define what a god should/shouldn't do or can/can't do. If he/she/it is the/a God, then isn't what they decide right? Since they make the rules?

 

[Quantum Foam]

Just because things aren't punished or stopped now doesn't mean things won't be taken care of in their proper time.

Personally I think that it is kind of "prideful" of someone to suggest that humans get to define what a god should/shouldn't do or can/can't do. If he/she/it is the/a God, then isn't what they decide right? Since they make the rules?

Yeah, sure. Everything will magically be taken care of in the "proper time." And by taken care of, i'm sure that will consist of burning in hell for all eternity or being reincarnated as a bug, all perfectly justified punishments. I would be appalled if I was being raped and you walked by and didn't help me and said, "well, it'll be taken care of in its proper time."

No, what god decides isn't right simply because it is god's decision. That's like saying the law necessarily represents morality when in reality it often represents the self interest and opinions of a small clique of assholes.

 

[Dak]

Depends on what law we are talking about. The God of the Bible gave a law set stating what he deemed right and wrong, and the punishments for the committing the wrongs. However, "modern civilizations" have no use for that law set, and yet wonder why everything is all fucked up....

 

[Quantum Foam]

Depends on what law we are talking about. The God of the Bible gave a law set stating what he deemed right and wrong, and the punishments for the committing the wrongs. However, "modern civilizations" have no use for that law set, and yet wonder why everything is all fucked up....

Huh? So I guess we all need to go back to the times of stoning adulterers as stated in the old testament or prohibiting divorce as stated in the new testament. While we're at it, let's go back to the time when Jews steal land from the Canaanites to create Israel. Wait a second. That last part already happened and things obviously are not fucked up for the palestinians, right? So you see, let's just follow the bible and everyone will be happy. Just to top it off, let's put the Catholic Church back in charge of Europe. I'm sure everyone dying of Aids in Africa will just love that and be so thankful for how fucked up things no longer are once popey old boy is dictator of the world.

 

[Dak]

Because just letting people freely fuck around has really created a better world. You're right, my bad. I am not saying everyone will be happy. There are always people who want to do bad stuff and no they won't be happy that they can't. But our current societies are pretty unhappy despite having "freedom". This is evidenced by the amount of people seeking "escape" by being addicted to every drug under the sun.

I was talking about a law set. Not the Catholic church, not the modern state of Israel.

 

[Quantum Foam]

Because just letting people freely fuck around has really created a better world. You're right, my bad. I am not saying everyone will be happy. There are always people who want to do bad stuff and no they won't be happy that they can't. But our current societies are pretty unhappy despite having "freedom". This is evidenced by the amount of people seeking "escape" by being addicted to every drug under the sun.

I was talking about a law set. Not the Catholic church, not the modern state of Israel.

do you believe we should stone adulterers to death? Do you believe divorce should be outlawed? Do you believe if god commands you to commit genocide, like he commands the Jews to in the old testament, that this is o.k.? If you answer yes to any of these questions, I feel bad for you.

 

[Dak]

A. Genocide was not a law.
B. Yes I do believe punishing adultery with death is legit. Adultery and divorce destroy the foundational institution of civilization, which is the family. Divorce is not outlawed in the bible. It is discouraged.

The problem is our modern society is so jacked up, that marriage is considered extremely flippantly. Plenty of people get married with the same amount of thought and effort they put into ordering a meal. So why not fuck around if you can just dip in and out of marriage anyway?

If you think adultery and divorce are good things then I feel bad for you.

 

[Dak]

The genocide issue in the OT is a completely different debate, but I highly recommend you look into the practices of those cultures before you start talking about it.

Just for starters, like how they sacrificed children on a regular basis. Real nice people.

 

[Quantum Foam]

B. Yes I do believe punishing adultery with death is legit.

People are committing adultery right now and civilization still exists and I don't think it is going to cease to exist anytime soon because of adultery. I'd say nuclear weapons, nanotechnology or a super virus like airborne Aids or some shit like from the movie Resident Evil Extinction are infinitely more likely to be the doom of the planet. Adultery doesn't kill anyone so to suggest someone should be killed for adultery is ludicrous.

The genocide issue in the OT is a completely different debate, but I highly recommend you look into the practices of those cultures before you start talking about it.

Just for starters, like how they sacrificed children on a regular basis. Real nice people.

Yeah, so in response kill EVERY SINGLE PERSON, including INFANTS AND CHILDREN because "god told me to do it." If someone used this logic today they would rightly be considered batshit insane.

Do you have anything less retarded to say?

 

[Dak]

People are committing adultery right now and civilization still exists and I don't think it is going to cease to exist anytime soon because of adultery. I'd say nuclear weapons, nanotechnology or a super virus like airborne Aids or some shit like from the movie Resident Evil Extinction are infinitely more likely to be the doom of the planet. Adultery doesn't kill anyone so to suggest someone should be killed for adultery is ludicrous.

You missed the point entirely. Congratulations.

Yeah, so in response kill EVERY SINGLE PERSON, including INFANTS AND CHILDREN because "god told me to do it." If someone used this logic today they would rightly be considered batshit insane.

Do you have anything less retarded to say?

So the alternative is to keep the children, which, upon reaching adulthood, find out that their adopted parents killed their actual parents. I am sure the children would completely understand and not want revenge.

That isn't even getting into the potential bloodline issues.

 

[Quantum Foam]

You missed the point entirely. Congratulations.




So the alternative is to keep the children, which, upon reaching adulthood, find out that their adopted parents killed their actual parents. I am sure the children would completely understand and not want revenge.

That isn't even getting into the potential bloodline issues.

I guess you will play the "high and mighty card" and not explain to me what point of yours i missed. You stated clearly that it's o.k. to punish someone with death who cheats on their spouse. I stated in response you are nuts. What else is there to discuss?

As regrads the genocidal Jews, there are so many things you are not taking into consideration. First of all, who the hell are the Jews to judge anyone else? May i remind you, Moses ordered the killing of 3,000 Jews during the Exodus because they worshipped "the wrong god." Now tell me about "moral high ground." That's just one example. I will give you one other. Who the hell in their right mind would think it is o.k. to kill the first born sons of Egypt in retaliation for Egyptian ensalvement of Jews? This clearly demonstrates the God of the bible is a lunatic who has not even the vaguest semblance of decency. But this is the god the genocide perpetrating Jews worship. Now what was that you were saying about Canaanite human sacrifice?

Let's dig a little deeper into this ridiculous discussion. There are many other things I could say about this, but I'll stick to responding specifically to what you wrote. For example, why would the Jews have to tell the children their parents were killed? Why would the children necessarily want revenge? Why couldn't god take the children and spread them out amongst other peoples in other lands? Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc.

People like you sicken me. You clearly can't think for yourself when it comes to making moral judgements but are purely interested in making up excuses for the god of the bible. Are you afraid you will go to hell if you speak the truth and call god a heartless S.O.B.?

 

[Quantum Foam]

If we were all walking around as holy automatons, then we might as well be angels, and there would be no need for our creation.

So life is not worth living unless there is not only evil, but vast amounts of it in the world?

 

[Dak]

Your ludicrous arguement that "the world still exists" missed the point at the damage adultery/divorce, or rather the mindset that leads to it's prevalence, does to society as a whole.

We have had nukes now for a long time and "the world still exists" to use your arguement. Just because the damage isn't total doesn't mean it isn't there. The punishment has to be severe to act as a deterrent. If you do what you are supposed to then it doesn't matter what the punishment is now does it?

I have taken plenty into consideration. The difference between you and me is you don't believe in YHWH and I do. You said "who are the Jews to judge?"

A. It was God (YHWH) who judged
B. It was the entire nation of Israel at the time, not just the Jews (tribe of Judah).

Like I said, I won't get into all the bloodline issues based off the Bible and other apocryphal writings. Basically there is a school of thought that says that the Canaanite bloodline had demonic genetics in it, supported by the existance of the decendants of the Nephilim in the land (the sons of Anak, and the Rephaites, etc).

Of course you don't believe any of that, so why you are even having this discussion is beyond me.

Apparently you think that everyone should be able to do whatever they want with 0 repercussions and somehow the world will work better. Although you can easily look around and see that isn't the case.

So life is not worth living unless there is not only evil, but vast amounts of it in the world?

You miss the point yet again. You don't have to choose evil. But the choice is there.

 

[Quantum Foam]

Your ludicrous arguement that "the world still exists" missed the point at the damage adultery/divorce, or rather the mindset that leads to it's prevalence, does to society as a whole.

We have had nukes now for a long time and "the world still exists" to use your arguement. Just because the damage isn't total doesn't mean it isn't there. The punishment has to be severe to act as a deterrent. If you do what you are supposed to then it doesn't matter what the punishment is now does it?

I have taken plenty into consideration. The difference between you and me is you don't believe in YHWH and I do. You said "who are the Jews to judge?"

A. It was God (YHWH) who judged
B. It was the entire nation of Israel at the time, not just the Jews (tribe of Judah).

Like I said, I won't get into all the bloodline issues based off the Bible and other apocryphal writings. Basically there is a school of thought that says that the Canaanite bloodline had demonic genetics in it, supported by the existance of the decendants of the Nephilim in the land (the sons of Anak, and the Rephaites, etc).

Of course you don't believe any of that, so why you are even having this discussion is beyond me.

Apparently you think that everyone should be able to do whatever they want with 0 repercussions and somehow the world will work better. Although you can easily look around and see that isn't the case.




You miss the point yet again. You don't have to choose evil. But the choice is there.

Adultery involves no killing. Yet it's o.k. to kill adulterers according to you and your holy book. Why not kill everyone who is a criminal then? Surely we need some type of law and order for civilization to exist in a tolerable form that doesn't rely on despotism. We have to deter thieves strongly, so let's murder them for stealing a loaf of bread. If we don't kill them, zombies might rise from the ninth circle of hell and eat our children. Seems like this would follow from your logic.

So I take it you are not even going to try to defend god killing egyptian babies or moses ordering the killing of 3,000 Jews simply for worshipping a different god. So I guess by your insane logic we should kill everyone who isn't of your particular religious persuasion. After all, your religion is true so why let all the other evil false ones infect society which will ultimately lead to a zombie holocaust?

Demonic genetics? Of course I don't believe any of this nonsense. Reputable scholars have more or less proven that most of what is in the bible didn't even happen. They are just stories made up by highly immoral people. I am having this discussion because I like to see how people defend themselves. You are clearly trying, but clearly failing miserably in not only the logic department but in the realm of basic human decency and morality. Talk of demonic genetics is not that different from what the nazis said about the Jews. For example, "the dirty jews are eating our german children in satanic rituals." Come on. Give me a break. Whoever is telling you there was demonic genes in the canaanites is just trying to convince you that it is o.k. to murder babies.

No, i didn't miss the point when i quoted the line from your original post. You missed the point of why i quoted it and what my response to it means. Let me be clearer. You mention if we were holy automatons we would be angels and there would be no reason for our creation. A holy automaton would not choose evil. So why are you responding to me in the last post by talking about "you don't have to choose evil but the choice is there"? This does not apply to the holy automaton example. I was asking you precisely what i asked you. Do you think life is not worth living unless there is vast amounts of evil in the world, that vast amount of evil being a product of free will? Or to put it differently in case you don't get what i'm getting at, wouldn't it be better to live as a holy automaton but have free will in matters other then morality then it is to live in the kind of world we live in where the amount of horrors are astronomical?

 

[Dak]

Life would obviously be better sans evil. But you are assuming that because the world is like [this] right now it will always be this way, since you don't believe in a higher power or predictions of the future.
This discussion really is and will go nowhere because our viewpoints are so far removed from each other we can't possibly see eye to eye on anything of importance.

Yes, by my insane logic everyone needs to die to save us from the zombies. Precisely. So glad we finally got that cleared up

 

[Quantum Foam]

But you are assuming that because the world is like [this] right now it will always be this way, since you don't believe in a higher power or predictions of the future.
This discussion really is and will go nowhere because our viewpoints are so far removed from each other we can't possibly see eye to eye on anything of importance.

I believe in the higher power of quantum foam.

It's not that we can't see eye to eye, it's that you can't adequately defend yourself in the face of my criticisms although you think you can. It's of no great concern to me though. You probably think i'm going to burn in hell. At least I will have used my own mind to think about what is morally correct and not just accept the "word of god" as the be all and end all of what is right and wrong regardless of how horrible of a world we live in.

 

[Dak]

Because relative morality is making the world such a better place right? I am not really interested in changing your mind. I am quite confident in future events validating my faith. You have the free will to continue in your current beliefs. I just don't see any benefit in them.