Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,398 Year: 3,655/9,624 Month: 526/974 Week: 139/276 Day: 13/23 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Atheists don't believe
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 28 of 310 (311396)
05-12-2006 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by riVeRraT
05-11-2006 8:24 AM


riVeRrat
1. Why don't you believe in the divine?
Firstly I have never heard an explanation of the divine that did not involve a belief first evidence second. This is precisely the situation we require of a person to avoid critical thinking. Having set the brain to believe we then proceed to "find" evidence to support the already accepted result. Therefore we will be forced by the pre-existing belief to ignore, diminish, or reintepret the importance of disconfirming results against the beleif.Hence the vast array of endless religious apologetics.
2. Do you believe in anything without evidence?
Not that I am aware of. I believe in love which is something I can acquire evidence of since I define love as those things to which I have a personal emotional tie with. There is,however, a love seperate from the one that involves our own feelings and need to placate our emotional well being. The love of nature and the sense of relaxation that it has for me.There is love that concerns the well being of others including strangers.There is love of watching your children as they grow up and you grow old, a kind of continuity that I find special.
I believe in community and the neccesity of having a stable atmosphere that allows us to be at ease and unafraid of others.All of these are presented with evidence though so perhaps This does not answer the question .
That said there is nothing that comes to mind that require a divine entity to be in order for such feelings to exist since these are ameanble to more mundane but no less wonderous explanations.

Dear Mrs Chown, Ignore your son's attempts to teach you physics. Physics isn't the most important thing. Love is.
Best wishes, Richard Feynman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by riVeRraT, posted 05-11-2006 8:24 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by robinrohan, posted 05-12-2006 12:03 PM sidelined has replied
 Message 32 by iano, posted 05-12-2006 2:43 PM sidelined has replied
 Message 43 by riVeRraT, posted 05-15-2006 7:32 AM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 30 of 310 (311407)
05-12-2006 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by robinrohan
05-12-2006 12:03 PM


robinrohan
Only if it is accompanied by a compelling arguement involving either a great evidentiary and logical reasoning or a weapon bigger than any in my arsenal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by robinrohan, posted 05-12-2006 12:03 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by robinrohan, posted 05-12-2006 3:27 PM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 35 of 310 (311562)
05-12-2006 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by iano
05-12-2006 2:43 PM


iano
sidelined writes:
Firstly I have never heard an explanation of the divine that did not involve a belief first evidence second. This is precisely the situation we require of a person to avoid critical thinking
Believing is seeing is another way to put it. Seeing first will result in us believing alright.
I am sorry but perhaps you can rephrase this since, as it stands, these two statements contradict one another.
Trust him or be compelled to believe he exists. If God exists then one or the other you will do.
Well this is indeed the crux of the matter is it not? How do we then explain, in my case, why I require that the existance of something so contradictory to experience be amenable to observation before I trust that such a condition actually applies in the world and ,failing this ,how is it I have never be compelled to the belief that you speak of?
Every knee will bow and every toungue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord".
It seems I must contradict you on this score as much as you may believe otherwise. That Jesus was anything other than a vague demigod of convenience for a splinter cult 2000 years ago is not something that holds a great deal of conviction for myself.That the bible claims many things does not speak to the veracity of the tales.It is far more likely IMHO that the bible is no more nor less than other ancient texts in the stories it portrays and the teachings it tries to pass on. I consider it the equivalent of a present day fiction in which moral values of an author can be passed down in an entertaining form.
This message has been edited by sidelined, Sat, 2006-05-13 01:33 AM

Dear Mrs Chown, Ignore your son's attempts to teach you physics. Physics isn't the most important thing. Love is.
Best wishes, Richard Feynman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by iano, posted 05-12-2006 2:43 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by iano, posted 05-14-2006 5:11 PM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 52 of 310 (311947)
05-15-2006 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by iano
05-14-2006 5:11 PM


iano
If one had the evidence first then one would have no choice but to believe - which causes the notion of free-will to evaporate.
Perhaps I am being thick here but exactly how does having the truth of a situation made apparent violate your free will?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by iano, posted 05-14-2006 5:11 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by iano, posted 05-15-2006 12:28 PM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 62 of 310 (312015)
05-15-2006 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by iano
05-15-2006 12:28 PM


iano
How can one freely chose to disbelieve that God exists if one is given irrefutable evidence that God exists? It seems to me that once you have the evidence then choice to disbelief is no more.
Oh yeah! If we KNEW there was a GOD without doubt then we would live in peace and enjoy the garden of eden right?
Adam and Eve walked with God and even obeyed his edict to not eat of the fruit of the tree of KOGAE until he allowed a snake to con eve and thus allow for the "fall" of men and the subsequent long journey etc etc etc.
Instead of removing the knowledge from them or now sitting them down and explaining the responsibilty that was now theirs {as a father would want to do} he instead curses them and the snake{all of whom were a creation of his making} and refuses to take the responsibilty that is his to begin with.
This God who had the capability to set the atoms in their motions the laws of nature in their place the vast stretches of the universe and their motions to ignite stars themselves finds difficulty with humans HE creates do things that HE sets up the conditions that HE subsequently allows to transpire? A God that created the universe has difficulty with his temper?
Did he somehow not know the snake was there? Did he not know the fruit had been picked by Eve? Can you say say coersion and entrapment?
If they were not to eat of the fruit of KOGAE then why was it there to begin with?
You wonder why I am atheist!?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by iano, posted 05-15-2006 12:28 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by iano, posted 05-15-2006 2:08 PM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 93 of 310 (312309)
05-16-2006 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by iano
05-15-2006 2:08 PM


iano
sidelined writes:
Oh yeah! If we KNEW there was a GOD without doubt then we would live in peace and enjoy the garden of eden right?
In your dreams I suspect if he gave full revelation of himself with us in our current state then widespread insanity would follow. For people would have reason to despair. For they cannot live the life demanded by a holy God.
Exactly which demand is that? These ones?
Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Exd 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth:
Exd 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me;
Exd 20:6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
Exd 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
Exd 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Exd 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
Exd 20:10 But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates:
Exd 20:11 For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Exd 20:12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Exd 20:13 Thou shalt not kill.
Exd 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Exd 20:15 Thou shalt not steal.
Exd 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Exd 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbour's.
Exd 20:18 And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw [it], they removed, and stood afar off.
Exd 20:19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.
Exd 20:20 And Moses said unto the people, Fear not: for God is come to prove you, and that his fear may be before your faces, that ye sin not.
Exd 20:21 And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God [was].
Exd 20:22 And the LORD said unto Moses, Thus thou shalt say unto the children of Israel, Ye have seen that I have talked with you from heaven.
Exd 20:23 Ye shall not make with me gods of silver, neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold.
Exd 20:24 An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.
Exd 20:25 And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it.
Exd 20:26 Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon
Perhaps these ones here
If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
Exd 21:3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
Exd 21:4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.
Exd 21:5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:
Exd 21:6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.
Exd 21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
Exd 21:8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
Exd 21:9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters.
Exd 21:10 If he take him another [wife]; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.
Exd 21:11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.
Exd 21:12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.
Exd 21:13 And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver [him] into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee.
Exd 21:14 But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.
Exd 21:15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
Exd 21:16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Exd 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
Exd 21:18 And if men strive together, and one smite another with a stone, or with [his] fist, and he die not, but keepeth [his] bed:
Exd 21:19 If he rise again, and walk abroad upon his staff, then shall he that smote [him] be quit: only he shall pay [for] the loss of his time, and shall cause [him] to be thoroughly healed.
Exd 21:20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
Exd 21:21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he [is] his money.
Exd 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart [from her], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges [determine].
Exd 21:23 And if [any] mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Exd 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Exd 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Exd 21:26 And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake.
Exd 21:27 And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake.
Exd 21:28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox [shall be] quit.
Exd 21:29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death.
Exd 21:30 If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him.
Exd 21:31 Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him.
Exd 21:32 If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.
Exd 21:33 And if a man shall open a pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein;
Exd 21:34 The owner of the pit shall make [it] good, [and] give money unto the owner of them; and the dead [beast] shall be his.
Exd 21:35 And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die; then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it; and the dead [ox] also they shall divide.
Exd 21:36 Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.
If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.
Exd 22:2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, [there shall] no blood [be shed] for him.
Exd 22:3 If the sun be risen upon him, [there shall be] blood [shed] for him; [for] he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.
Exd 22:4 If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep; he shall restore double.
Exd 22:5 If a man shall cause a field or vineyard to be eaten, and shall put in his beast, and shall feed in another man's field; of the best of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he make restitution.
Exd 22:6 If fire break out, and catch in thorns, so that the stacks of corn, or the standing corn, or the field, be consumed [therewith]; he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.
Exd 22:7 If a man shall deliver unto his neighbour money or stuff to keep, and it be stolen out of the man's house; if the thief be found, let him pay double.
Exd 22:8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, [to see] whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour's goods.
Exd 22:9 For all manner of trespass, [whether it be] for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, [or] for any manner of lost thing, which [another] challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; [and] whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.
Exd 22:10 If a man deliver unto his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die, or be hurt, or driven away, no man seeing [it]:
Exd 22:11 [Then] shall an oath of the LORD be between them both, that he hath not put his hand unto his neighbour's goods; and the owner of it shall accept [thereof], and he shall not make [it] good.
Exd 22:12 And if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution unto the owner thereof.
Exd 22:13 If it be torn in pieces, [then] let him bring it [for] witness, [and] he shall not make good that which was torn.
Exd 22:14 And if a man borrow [ought] of his neighbour, and it be hurt, or die, the owner thereof [being] not with it, he shall surely make [it] good.
Exd 22:15 [But] if the owner thereof [be] with it, he shall not make [it] good: if it [be] an hired [thing], it came for his hire.
Exd 22:16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.
Exd 22:17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.
Exd 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Exd 22:19 Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.
Exd 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto [any] god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
Exd 22:21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
Exd 22:22 Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child.
Exd 22:23 If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry;
Exd 22:24 And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless.
Exd 22:25 If thou lend money to [any of] my people [that is] poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.
Exd 22:26 If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver it unto him by that the sun goeth down:
Exd 22:27 For that [is] his covering only, it [is] his raiment for his skin: wherein shall he sleep? and it shall come to pass, when he crieth unto me, that I will hear; for I [am] gracious.
Exd 22:28 Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.
Exd 22:29 Thou shalt not delay [to offer] the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me.
Exd 22:30 Likewise shalt thou do with thine oxen, [and] with thy sheep: seven days it shall be with his dam; on the eighth day thou shalt give it me.
Exd 22:31 And ye shall be holy men unto me: neither shall ye eat [any] flesh [that is] torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs.
Would you care to point out the ones that you choose to ignore or do you actually follow all of these?
sidelined writes:
Adam and Eve walked with God and even obeyed his edict to not eat of the fruit of the tree of KOGAE until he allowed a snake to con eve and thus allow for the "fall" of men and the subsequent long journey etc etc etc.
God telling them what not to do (a pull in one direction) and....vacuuum. Nothing to pull them in the opposite direction. This is not choice. Choice only becomes choice when the pull (attraction) in either direction is perfectly balanced. The serpent fulfilled that role. God says vs the serpent says. Man, for the first time, had choice. And he exercised it.
So you are saying that God needed the serpent to tempt Eve into partaking of the fruit which she clearly had not partaken of as per her statement
Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
At this point she has no knowledge of good and evil and is innocent and obeying of the command given to her.She cannot therefore concieve that the serpent is lying to her since this is an evil act. Would you seriously do this to a child of yours? Under any circumstances?
I don't think so. God created free willed beings and they exercised their will. I fail to see how some of the alternatives you put up would enable this. God taking them aside for instance and fully explaining (nay showing them) what the full consequences would be would have been unfair - unless some other equally powerful attraction in the opposite direction was allowed to arise. Balanced it had to be.
How do you suppose it would be unfair? Would you care to explain to me what possible threat the two of them could pose to God by eating of the tree of KOGAE and why disobeying under coersion when incapable of discerning a good act from a bad one and exercising free will that they were imbued with by God is a problem?
God took the chance himself and then is furious when his creation excercises the freewill that they must be allowed to make in order for it to be balanced as you say.The imperfection that they demonstrated by the act of choosing is ultimately with God and if God has a problem he should discuss the responsibilty for it with a mirror.
Would you fancy relationships with folk who had no choice but to obey you? Not much fun in that after the novelty wore off. Not much chance for love to flourish either.
I would not punish them for making the choice to disobey since I am the one who created them and set the conditions up. If I throw a party where I allow the people the option of drinking and driving or me paying for cab fair home and then ply them with liquor I cannot therefore wash my hands of responsibilty for any subsequent tragedy that may follow,nor can I chastise them for making the choice that I allowed them.
Maybe you can think of how to create fully free willed beings without them being able to chose against you? If you could, it would strenghten your position.
I would allow them to do as they pleased since after all there is no damage they can do that I cannot undo in the first place if I am limitless in abilty and power.
So here is the edict I would place on them. You are free to do whatever you wish to do as long as it does not interfere with the freewill choice of another human being. This is my only rule and if you do not like it,oh well, deal with it.Screw with my rule and I will make your eyes bubble in their sockets.Any questions? Good! Carry on.
The reason your an atheist is that you have not compelling proof that satisfies you that God exists. God cannot give you compelling evidence against you free will - that would destroy your free-will in the process of him giving it. Resolution of the paradox seems to me only to be possible if you willing lay aside you free will (its yours to do with as you please). Then he can show you.
No the reason I am an atheist is that the idea of a god is not sensible in the first place.There is indeed not only no compelling evidence there is no evidence at all. The impression I have always recieved from believers is that the concept of a God is a means of dodging resposibilty for the questionable inclinations and impulses that we attend to in our short lives.
I think this is why the Christian religion is so popular. Just first beleive that christ died for you and all those crimes you commited are forgiven. How comforting and how coercive.Almost a temptation I would think.
If I were to be a believer in the bible it is my considered opinion that the lesson of the offer of christ to lay your sins upon him is biblical God's way of weeding out the people willing to sacrifice another person to avoid accepting responsibilty. These people would not be allowed in heaven since this is a despicable thing to do to the innocent and if you would do something so selfish then it is plain that love of others is not something you are capable of. This is a subtle test of mortals worthy of a moral God methinks..

Dear Mrs Chown, Ignore your son's attempts to teach you physics. Physics isn't the most important thing. Love is.
Best wishes, Richard Feynman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by iano, posted 05-15-2006 2:08 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by iano, posted 05-16-2006 8:16 AM sidelined has replied
 Message 103 by riVeRraT, posted 05-16-2006 11:11 AM sidelined has replied
 Message 147 by Larni, posted 05-17-2006 4:15 AM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 108 of 310 (312426)
05-16-2006 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by riVeRraT
05-16-2006 11:11 AM


riVeRrat
It's irresponsible to go and fecth verses/laws from the OT and post them, without including the ones that were fulfilled by Jesus
I am an atheist this stuff does not concern me. This is your beliefs layed bare before you. Here is the authority of Jesus on this issue.
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
So here we have christ saying that the laws still pertain and shall pertain until all be fulfilled. Thus the laws I outlined still apply and I ask again which do you choose to ignore and why?
Edited by sidelined, : Need to complete quote box

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by riVeRraT, posted 05-16-2006 11:11 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by riVeRraT, posted 05-16-2006 5:05 PM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 235 of 310 (312884)
05-17-2006 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by iano
05-16-2006 8:16 AM


iano
Sorry for not answering sooner but your reply did not show up at first. I recorded a reply first from RiVerRat and answered him. Weird software bug I guess.
Anyway here we go.
ssume this to mean that you would not do this to your child. And this is
iano writes:
Whether it is those you listed or the summation of them given by Jesus then answer is the same. I ignore/break them more often than not. I don't see your point
This was a response to a previous statement of yours here.
In your dreams I suspect if he gave full revelation of himself with us in our current state then widespread insanity would follow. For people would have reason to despair. For they cannot live the life demanded by a holy God.
What I was trying to point out is that if you check on the laws that the biblical God is insisting on then of course no one can live the life demanded thereof because in a lot of cases it is wrong to do so.
These ones in particular are immoral in my humble opinion.
Exd 21:16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Exd 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
Exd 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Exd 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Exd 22:3 If the sun be risen upon him, [there shall be] blood [shed] for him; [for] he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.
sidelined writes:
So you are saying that God needed the serpent to tempt Eve into partaking of the fruit which she clearly had not partaken of as per her statement
Do you mean to tell me that God could not know that they would succumb to temptation? That they ate of the tree produces what great detriment to us or God. Why is it a crime to have knowledge of good and evil? Is this not the basis for any type of morality,relative or otherwise,a sense of right and wrong?
The supposed punishment fits the crime in what way? We disobey God and why would this be a problem for him? That he needed to tempt innocent people {who did not yet have a sense of right and wrong} in order for them to consider eating of the fruit which they would not otherwise do
speaks of a problem on the part of God not humans.
sidelined writes:
At this point she has no knowledge of good and evil and is innocent and obeying of the command given to her.She cannot therefore concieve that the serpent is lying to her since this is an evil act. Would you seriously do this to a child of yours? Under any circumstances?
God says, the serpent says. We cannot use the image of a modern day child in order to compare - for a modern day child is born a sinner so one needs to make overly sure that they won't fall into temptation.
*sigh* Fine but this does not answer the question. Let us simply have you tell us that you would do this to Adam and Eve who I assume are innocent correct?
I don't see any mention of Adam and Eves culpability here. You seem to think that God cannot make a free-willed person capable of making a choice.That culpability can never have been theirs. No doubt if they had chosen to obey God then you would accuse the choice as having been rigged in favor of them doing so (well you wouldn't actually - there have been a fall in the first place!)
That is completely incorrect. My point is that after he gave them the right to choose they chose not to eat and God has a serpent tempt them in order to entrap them. Since it is a given that God {being omnipotent} knew that they would sucuumb one is left to wonder is God's motive for this? Why would he get so angry when he knew what would happen? What,again, is the great horror of the act that inflicts a curse of that magnitude when God himself was completely aware of the outcome? Why give freewill when you yourself are not ready to accept the outcome either way?
iano writes:
Maybe you can think of how to create fully free willed beings without them being able to chose against you? If you could, it would strenghten your position.
sidelined writes:
I would allow them to do as they pleased since after all there is no damage they can do that I cannot undo in the first place if I am limitless in abilty and power.
So here is the edict I would place on them. You are free to do whatever you wish to do as long as it does not interfere with the freewill choice of another human being. This is my only rule and if you do not like it,oh well, deal with it.Screw with my rule and I will make your eyes bubble in their sockets. Any questions? Good! Carry on.
iano writes:
So you have a lot of people with bubbling eye sockets (curious that blindness is the result in your model). They will have chosen against you. Like to try again? Or maybe do as he did and include a plan of redemption from the get go - knowing full well what free-willed (but necessary) choice will lead to.
But again we must ask why God has a problem with the choices we make if he demands that we have free choice in the first place. What is the point of the punishment? To teach them a lesson? To instill fear in them? If you build a machine that has a great likelihood of falling apart but you will not change the designs to make the product more reliable and then as a bonus you toss a wrench into the works and it ends up failing your strict requirements for reliabilty you would blame the machine you made? That is madness.
I will try to get to responding to the rest of your post another day as I am at present pressed for time. Again i am sorry I took so long to respond.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by iano, posted 05-16-2006 8:16 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by iano, posted 05-17-2006 2:27 PM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 265 of 310 (314148)
05-21-2006 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 236 by iano
05-17-2006 2:27 PM


iano
The question is whether the proscribed 'reaction' is warranted given the 'action'? Eye for an eye it largely seems to be - or less than that I would argue. Are you arguing against the justice of eye for an eye?
The arguement for an eye for an eye is too simple for the application to humans. If I were to steal a dollar from you I could agree then that the replacement of a dollar seems to be a vialble solution. This is because I assume we are on relatively equal economic grounds.
However the application of eye for an eye would not be so cut and dried if we take a more complex but still plausible situation.
A man is begging for food and is slowly starving {since he smells bad and people will not help him out} and in desperation he succumbs to the temptation to break into a food store after hours and eating to satisfy his hunger. Beyond that he has no wish to commit further transgressions and,as he goes to leave out the back entrance from which he left, is confronted by the store owner who had stayed at the store after hours to drink away his sorrows and who had passed out previous to the beggar breaking in.
While intoxicated ,he levels a handgun at the thief and screams at him to stay where he is and discharges the weapon accidently.The theif is hit in the right leg and is dropped to the ground, but the desperation of his situation now apparent to him he ignores the pain and rises to fight back.
A police officer on patrol in the town had noticed the discharge flash of the handgun from the front of the store and drives around back and parks his vehicle at the door that the beggar had pried open to gain entrance.He gets out and,weapon drawn, proceeds inside where he hears the commotion.
He observes the two men struggling for control of something and raises his revolver and draws aim then commands the two to stop.
The thief and the store owner had just become entangled in a fight for control of the weapon and when the officer yelled at them to stop they both reflexively raised the arms that were locked in combative engagement for the weapon, an action that caused them to grip tigher to the pistol and the weapon subsequently discharges hitting the police officer in the face and ,in another reflexive action, the officer lets off a round that subsequently kills the store owner.
Now, just on the basis of eye for an eye,what justice can we meet out to "balance the scales of justice" so that equilibrium returns to the social order that was disrupted?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by iano, posted 05-17-2006 2:27 PM iano 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