Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   God or No God - that is the question (for atheists)
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 226 of 300 (232738)
08-12-2005 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by iano
08-12-2005 8:24 AM


Re: Time to wrap up folks
Which when you think about it, is precisely what a God who made us with free will to chose for/against him - but who didn't want to load the deck in his favour would do.
I don't think it's been questioned that a God who didn't want it to be obvious that he existed would act like he didn't exist.
What nobody's been able to address so far is my conclusion - if that's the God that you believe in, how are you not an atheist?
Oh, and one thing - your false dichotomy. Why does God have to feign non-existence? You act like there's only two possible options - believe that God doesn't exist, or worship him. Isn't there a third possibility? That someone might believe in God but revile him? Isn't that the position a lot of people take on Satan, for instance?
God could make his presence absolutely beyond question without any disruption of our free will. We'd still have the choice to follow him or tell him to stuff it.
This message has been edited by crashfrog, 08-12-2005 05:01 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by iano, posted 08-12-2005 8:24 AM iano has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by ramoss, posted 08-12-2005 6:22 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 230 by purpledawn, posted 08-13-2005 7:12 AM crashfrog has not replied

DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 4754 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 227 of 300 (232770)
08-12-2005 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by iano
08-12-2005 2:47 PM


Re: And the Lord said "Let there be Bang!!"
iano writes:
...a God who is no more 'addtional' than a blind mechanism which could cause all this, for which there is no evidence whatsoever and who would be a far more rational starting assumption if one didn't have a clue know either way.
If an additional entity was needed, you start simple, and add complexity only as it is needed. 'God', being a hypothetical person, is just about as complex as you can get. Now, why might a person choose to start with a tangled mess instead of something simple? Well, it would achieve some sort of finality; ie, "We can never understand God," which gives you an excuse to give up. And, of course, it also allows theists to keep believing what they currently believe about God; ie, "Further understanding is impossible, but what I already understand about God is right."
Both of those are emotional -- not rational.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by iano, posted 08-12-2005 2:47 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by iano, posted 08-15-2005 8:10 AM DominionSeraph has replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 228 of 300 (232778)
08-12-2005 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by crashfrog
08-12-2005 4:58 PM


Re: Time to wrap up folks
There are even more.
There is believing in god, but thinking God only set the universe in motion, and then laid back and did nothing. Or, yu can think that God is the universe...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by crashfrog, posted 08-12-2005 4:58 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by PurpleYouko, posted 08-12-2005 8:09 PM ramoss has not replied

PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 229 of 300 (232806)
08-12-2005 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by ramoss
08-12-2005 6:22 PM


Re: Time to wrap up folks
I think we are all part of some great big sim-life game. God played a bit then got bored and left us alone to get on with it.
Maybe one day he will come back and play some more.
Or maybe he might just push the OFF button.
What a final, ironic end to life, the universe and everything that would be.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by ramoss, posted 08-12-2005 6:22 PM ramoss has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 230 of 300 (232927)
08-13-2005 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by crashfrog
08-12-2005 4:58 PM


Free Will
quote:
God could make his presence absolutely beyond question without any disruption of our free will.
free will - freedom of the will to choose a course of action without external coercion
will - the power of making a reasoned choice or decision or of controlling one's own actions
From what I can tell, the OT is full of external coercion from God.
I don't understand why they feel that their God, by making an unquestionable appearance to humanity, would affect our will.
Aren't threats of eternal damnation an external coercion?
In general our lives are not truly free from external coercion anyway.
I think "free will" is going on my list of fantasy words. It looks nice in a fiction setting, but doesn't really hold up in reality.

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by crashfrog, posted 08-12-2005 4:58 PM crashfrog has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 231 of 300 (233118)
08-14-2005 2:43 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by iano
08-12-2005 9:50 AM


Re: Time to wrap up folks
quote:
If such a God informed us at all objectively as to his existance, then there would be no choice left to make - what proportion of humanity has realised that ?
That only says that the decision is obvious. But if that is the case, then a God who wanted us to choose him of our own free will would provide that proof - since that would give Him what He wants.
Understanding the choice to be made cannot be said to impede free will. In fact it is necessary to the fullest exercise of free will. Why would a God who values free will want a decision to be made on the basis of ignorance or error ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by iano, posted 08-12-2005 9:50 AM iano has not replied

Lizard Breath
Member (Idle past 6696 days)
Posts: 376
Joined: 10-19-2003


Message 232 of 300 (233222)
08-14-2005 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by iano
08-11-2005 5:20 AM


Re: Falsify
...(although I cringe slightly at the thought of addressing anyone who comes up with such a fine anaolgy as Lizard Breath!)Lizard Breath
For the record, I don't have halatosis. I use Crest Gel, Floss, Mint Green Scope and Sugar Free Gum.
I came up with the handle of Lizard Breath as a play on words and a pun on myself because I can't spell. Never could.
The Komoto Dragon is said to have a putrid stentch emitting from it's mouth and such a high density of bacteria that a bite from one dragon can lead to death from infection. Knowing myself well enough, I assumed that my posts would achive the same effect in a linguistic manner. Very offensive but respected by proxy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by iano, posted 08-11-2005 5:20 AM iano has not replied

Lizard Breath
Member (Idle past 6696 days)
Posts: 376
Joined: 10-19-2003


Message 233 of 300 (233228)
08-14-2005 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by PaulK
08-11-2005 3:54 AM


Re: Falsify
If we follow your analogy we find a God who uses us for His own aesthetic satisfaction - perhaps a God who finds wars beautiful, or who arranged the Holocaust
I look at it like this. If Grand Design is responsible for all of this, then by it's own witness of sheer complexity, the one who created all of this must be vastly complex in both thought and deed. So I look at all of the various religions out there and find gods who are basically mirror images of humans with their faults amplified. There's nothing complex about any of those gods. Any type of religion I also discount because they can all be summed up as works oriented where man tries to reach up to God. That's impossible but very prideful to even attempt it indeed.
I have discovered that the Creator attested to in the Bible reveals a being that is far more complex than all of my ability to understand will lend.
So by you trying to tie up my tapestry into a neat little package of an evil sadistic being, is fanciful at best.
The Bible says that no one can know or understand the mind of God, and a timeless eternity is being prepared for those to spend it in, for just that very purpose. It will take an eternity to even begin to understand such a complex being and we were specifically created for that purpose, with the ability to grasp it in small doses, process it and then prepare for more. Humans are eternal according to the Bible and this complex Creator forknew us before we were created. That is complexity. That is intellengence. That is ability concurrent with the abilities to speak a universe into existance.
The Bible claims that the central focal point of creation was not the universe but Man. Man is the only entity that was created by the Creators own hands and received the Creator's own breath of life. Everything else was either thought into or spoken into existance according to the Bible.
So to say that God finds war beautiful is incorrect. But he can take it and use it for his purpose. The most important thing to the Creator of the Bible is not our pleasure and happiness here on this planet in this lifetime. That is of minimal importance to him. Otherwise, everyone who would become a follower would experience a plethara of wealth as soon as they proclaimed their faith.
Something far more complex and extravegant is happening than total world bliss in this lifetime, and this revealed complexity is supportive of Grand Design and a super unimaginably complex Creator.
What we perceive as pain, suffering and evil are just that by are own acknowledgement, and the Creator's. But just like the steps in the processing of the wool, the circumstances that we are experiencing are being used to mold us into something like usable thread that will become part of something magnificent and everlasting instead of dead shedded sheep's wool that falls off and rots on the ground.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by PaulK, posted 08-11-2005 3:54 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by DominionSeraph, posted 08-14-2005 8:54 PM Lizard Breath has replied
 Message 237 by PaulK, posted 08-15-2005 3:01 AM Lizard Breath has not replied

DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 4754 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 234 of 300 (233245)
08-14-2005 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by Lizard Breath
08-14-2005 8:19 PM


Lizard Breath writes:
If Grand Design is responsible for all of this, then by it's own witness of sheer complexity, the one who created all of this must be vastly complex in both thought and deed.
If there is a Grand Design, we're redundant -- unless things aren't going as planned.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Lizard Breath, posted 08-14-2005 8:19 PM Lizard Breath has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by Lizard Breath, posted 08-14-2005 9:04 PM DominionSeraph has replied

Lizard Breath
Member (Idle past 6696 days)
Posts: 376
Joined: 10-19-2003


Message 235 of 300 (233247)
08-14-2005 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by DominionSeraph
08-14-2005 8:54 PM


Explain please
I'm not following what you mean of us as redundant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by DominionSeraph, posted 08-14-2005 8:54 PM DominionSeraph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by DominionSeraph, posted 08-15-2005 12:07 AM Lizard Breath has not replied

DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 4754 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 236 of 300 (233298)
08-15-2005 12:07 AM
Reply to: Message 235 by Lizard Breath
08-14-2005 9:04 PM


Explaination
It'd be like me playing a chess game in my head, and then writing a chess program so that the two computer opponents play the same game that I just did.
Unless I'm checking for mistakes, that's kinda pointless.
I wouldn't worry about it, though. There were about a dozen patches released in Genesis alone.
The Biblical God is a lousy programmer.
This message has been edited by DominionSeraph, 08-15-2005 12:36 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Lizard Breath, posted 08-14-2005 9:04 PM Lizard Breath has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 237 of 300 (233317)
08-15-2005 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 233 by Lizard Breath
08-14-2005 8:19 PM


Re: Falsify
quote:
So by you trying to tie up my tapestry into a neat little package of an evil sadistic being, is fanciful at best.
Well lets look at the quote again
If we follow your analogy we find a God who uses us for His own aesthetic satisfaction - perhaps a God who finds wars beautiful, or who arranged the Holocaust
The initial point IS your analogy. According to it God arranges human suffering BECAUSE it produces a beautiful "tapestry". So there is nothing fanciful in that - and if that depiction of God is "evil and sadistic" then it is your analogy that says so.
Then we have the suggestion that the God in question might find wars beautiful. It's a reasonable possibility given the analogy. Wars are a large scale human activity - and therefore likely to be significant parts of the human portion if the "tapestry" - and do produce large amounts of human suffering as the analogy requires. I do not see that this depicts the God of the analogy as sadistic (since I do not state what aspects of wars are considered aesthetically pleasing) or any more evil than the analogy has already claimed.
The final point is the suggestion that the God of the analogy might have arranged the Holocaust. Since the God in question DOES arrange human suffering there is nothing overly fanciful in suggesting that that such a major event with so much suffering might have been an example. And since this point closely follows the analogy, any suggestion of "evil" or "sadism" is due to the analogy itself.
Quite frankly you seem to be offended by your own analogy - in which case I suggest that the problem is that your analogy does not accurately convey your view.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Lizard Breath, posted 08-14-2005 8:19 PM Lizard Breath has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by DominionSeraph, posted 08-15-2005 4:06 AM PaulK has replied

DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 4754 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 238 of 300 (233325)
08-15-2005 4:06 AM
Reply to: Message 237 by PaulK
08-15-2005 3:01 AM


Re: Falsify
PaulK writes:
The initial point IS your analogy. According to it God arranges human suffering BECAUSE it produces a beautiful "tapestry".
I didn't see that in there. The suffering seemed incidental.
To me, it was more of, "God wants his pretty tapestry, and he doesn't care who he hurts in the process of getting it."
It'd be like if God thought your arms would look prettier if your arms bent the other way, so he broke your elbows. He was even kind enough to put a picture of what you look like with your arms bent backwards in plain sight. You so pretty!
But because of your shortsightedness, you blow off the idea of a psychopathic God as the fanciful creation of some pretty sick puppies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by PaulK, posted 08-15-2005 3:01 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by PaulK, posted 08-15-2005 4:18 AM DominionSeraph has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 239 of 300 (233327)
08-15-2005 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 238 by DominionSeraph
08-15-2005 4:06 AM


Re: Falsify
I suppose that the analogy didn't really address the issue of alternative means to produce the same result (which means that it is inadequate to deal with the issue of an omnipotent God), but in the analogy there is no oher practical way to produce the result.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by DominionSeraph, posted 08-15-2005 4:06 AM DominionSeraph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by DominionSeraph, posted 08-15-2005 5:15 AM PaulK has not replied

DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 4754 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 240 of 300 (233330)
08-15-2005 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 239 by PaulK
08-15-2005 4:18 AM


True, but the suffering is still incidental.
This isn't a Tapestry of Life, in which the suffering is included in the pattern, as time is one of the dimensions of the tapestry. This is a tapestry of the living, with twisted bodies making up the pattern.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by PaulK, posted 08-15-2005 4:18 AM PaulK has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024