Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 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 is cruel
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 31 of 301 (300628)
04-03-2006 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Chiroptera
04-03-2006 2:27 PM


Yeah! Why don't we each get a chance to eat or not eat the apple?
Just as a practical matter, how long do you think you could hold out not eating something that was specifically identified to you as the one thing you are not allowed to eat, and this other being comes along (you can't have one part of the story without the other you know) and tells you that God lied to you and it's really good to eat and will make you as smart as God?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Chiroptera, posted 04-03-2006 2:27 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by DorfMan, posted 04-04-2006 10:46 AM Faith has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 32 of 301 (300629)
04-03-2006 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Protomenace
04-02-2006 7:15 PM


One Assumption too many
Protomenace writes:
First let's make some assumptions. Let's assume that god is real, god created me, and atheists go to hell.
Ok, so if god created me, didn't he make me the way I am? He made a person who requires empirical evidence to believe things. As we all know, god has supplied no such evidence. So I go to hell? Wait a second, that seems a little unfair god. It's not my fault I'm the way I am, it's your fault. You made me this way. Isn't that a bit cruel on god's part?
So, I have to assume that A. God is cruel. or B. God isn't real.
Lets review the assumptions prior to the fact.
1) God is real. I can agree with that one.
2) God created me. Again, I agree that God is the uncaused first cause. Even if we evolved, He indirectly created us,IMHO.
3)atheists go to hell. Here is where the assumptions backed you into a corner. I don't know about Hell, and will, for the purpose of this discussion, assume that it is real. Even so, God never created Hell for human beings.
God created Hell as a place where the spirits who freely request autonomy end up. Those spirits wanted a place to commune free from Gods influence and they got what they asked for.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Protomenace, posted 04-02-2006 7:15 PM Protomenace has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 33 of 301 (300630)
04-03-2006 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by DeclinetoState
04-03-2006 2:00 PM


John 3.
Yes, the part you quote is what most of the Fundamentalists quotemine, but they don't go one to read the rest of John 3.
If you read the rest of John 3, what you find is that the condemnation is related to what folk do, to acts, to actions. What John 3 is saying is that those who actually do recieve the Gospel, that Love GOD and love others as they love themselves, will be saved.
And how does someone Love GOD? It's not by believing in GOD, or professing, it's through actions. That's where Matthew 25 comes in.
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by DeclinetoState, posted 04-03-2006 2:00 PM DeclinetoState has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 301 (300631)
04-03-2006 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Chiroptera
04-03-2006 2:27 PM


Yeah! Why don't we each get a chance to eat or not eat the apple?
Evertime you make a decision between right and wrong you get that chance; when you choose wrong, you are 'eating the apple'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Chiroptera, posted 04-03-2006 2:27 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Chiroptera, posted 04-03-2006 4:17 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 59 by Heathen, posted 04-03-2006 5:02 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 35 of 301 (300632)
04-03-2006 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Heathen
04-03-2006 2:07 PM


So if God is so merciful why doesn't he simply put us back to the pre-fall position? instead of holding us all responsible for the actions of Adam and Eve however many thousands of years ago?
Because he's also a God of justice and righteousness. He doesn't act whimsically. Mercy doesn't ignore justice, it still has to meet its terms.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Heathen, posted 04-03-2006 2:07 PM Heathen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Heathen, posted 04-03-2006 4:53 PM Faith has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 301 (300633)
04-03-2006 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Protomenace
04-02-2006 7:15 PM


"Cruel" here is being used in a moral sense (it's immoral to be cruel). But if we have no objective morality, then our moral judgments are subjective and hence meaningless as far as being proofs of anything.
So if you say "The fact that atheists go to hell is an immoral act on the part of God," you have uttered a mere subjective statement which proves nothing one way or another about God.
If there is no God, then our morality is subjective.
You would need an objective morality, provided by God, to prove that God is cruel.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Protomenace, posted 04-02-2006 7:15 PM Protomenace has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Faith, posted 04-03-2006 2:54 PM robinrohan has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 37 of 301 (300637)
04-03-2006 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by robinrohan
04-03-2006 2:44 PM


You would need an objective morality, provided by God, to prove that God is cruel.
You may have just proved the necessity of the existence of God, Robin.
It is starting to sound something like what C.S. Lewis was getting at when he argued for God from the existence of human moral feeling. People call God cruel with a strong sense of indignation, but in order to justify such a judgment they need an objective ground for morality, and the only objective ground possible is God. So God must be real and their judgment false.
This message has been edited by Faith, 04-03-2006 02:54 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by robinrohan, posted 04-03-2006 2:44 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-03-2006 2:59 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 39 by robinrohan, posted 04-03-2006 3:01 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 60 by Heathen, posted 04-03-2006 5:05 PM Faith has replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 301 (300642)
04-03-2006 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Faith
04-03-2006 2:54 PM


People call God cruel with a strong sense of indignation, but in order to justify such a judgment they need an objective ground for morality, and the only objective ground possible is God.
No we don't. Humankind has developed its own moral code, which works to the benefit of society. (For instance, we all have an easier time when we can agree that killing people is bad.)
Is it objective? No. Is it ingrained in both society and our minds, and extraordinarily useful? Sure.
Regardless... this topic assumes that God exists, doesn't it? I think we can all generally agree that the Christian God would consider torturing billions of people for all eternity for no discernable reason to be cruel. And since we're assuming he exists, what's the problem?

"We had survived to turn on the History Channel
And ask our esteemed panel, Why are we alive? And here's how they replied:
You're what happens when two substances collide
And by all accounts you really should have died."
-Andrew Bird

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Faith, posted 04-03-2006 2:54 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by robinrohan, posted 04-03-2006 3:04 PM Dan Carroll has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 301 (300644)
04-03-2006 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Faith
04-03-2006 2:54 PM


You may have just proved the necessity of the existence of God, Robin.
No, all I've done is eliminate what might be called "the moral argument against God."
I haven't proven anything in regard to God's existence. All I've done is say that we cannot judge God morally if our morality is subjective.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Faith, posted 04-03-2006 2:54 PM Faith has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 301 (300645)
04-03-2006 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Dan Carroll
04-03-2006 2:59 PM


Is it objective? No.
But if it's not objective, it's useless as a proof of anything. It's just a personal preference we have. We can't prove God is cruel if we have no objective knowledge of what constitutes cruelty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-03-2006 2:59 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-03-2006 3:07 PM robinrohan has replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 301 (300649)
04-03-2006 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by robinrohan
04-03-2006 3:04 PM


But if it's not objective, it's useless as a proof of anything.
But if we're arguing that God is cruel, we're first assuming he exists. So what's your problem?
Very simply... if God exists, then he is, by his objective standards, cruel. If he doesn't, then the subject of his morality is pretty much moot, whether or not objective morality exists.
It's just a personal preference we have.
In the same way that not shoving feces-covered knives through our throats is a personal preference, I suppose.

"We had survived to turn on the History Channel
And ask our esteemed panel, Why are we alive? And here's how they replied:
You're what happens when two substances collide
And by all accounts you really should have died."
-Andrew Bird

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by robinrohan, posted 04-03-2006 3:04 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by robinrohan, posted 04-03-2006 3:13 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Protomenace
Junior Member (Idle past 6568 days)
Posts: 15
Joined: 04-02-2006


Message 42 of 301 (300650)
04-03-2006 3:09 PM


The general consensus seems to be that my argument is logically sound, and the debate is about whether or not simply being an atheist merits a trip to hell.
Following the same principles of logic, would it not be correct to infer that if such a god exists (one that creates all), it would be indirectly responsible for all occurances in the universe it has created, including criminal behavior?
This message has been edited by protomenace, 04-03-2006 03:16 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-03-2006 3:34 PM Protomenace has not replied
 Message 78 by Brian, posted 04-04-2006 7:35 AM Protomenace has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 301 (300652)
04-03-2006 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Dan Carroll
04-03-2006 3:07 PM


Actually, there's a hidden argument here. Note this from the OP.
So, I have to assume that A. God is cruel. or B. God isn't real.
What he's really saying is that if God existed he would be cruel (so He doesn't exist). But if our morality is subjective, then we can't make objective moral judgments.
So we can't prove God doesn't exist by calling him cruel.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-03-2006 3:07 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Protomenace, posted 04-03-2006 3:16 PM robinrohan has not replied
 Message 45 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-03-2006 3:22 PM robinrohan has not replied
 Message 61 by Chiroptera, posted 04-03-2006 5:11 PM robinrohan has not replied

Protomenace
Junior Member (Idle past 6568 days)
Posts: 15
Joined: 04-02-2006


Message 44 of 301 (300654)
04-03-2006 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by robinrohan
04-03-2006 3:13 PM


Well, then either he exists and sends people to hell for making choices which he outlined in their creation, or he does not exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by robinrohan, posted 04-03-2006 3:13 PM robinrohan has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-03-2006 3:29 PM Protomenace has replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 301 (300655)
04-03-2006 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by robinrohan
04-03-2006 3:13 PM


What he's really saying
Always a fun game to play. I think you're really saying, "Dan is so cool!"
Thanks!
if God existed he would be cruel (so He doesn't exist). But if our morality is subjective, then we can't make objective moral judgments.
Yeah, I read this the first dozen or so times you posted it. Again... in discussing the subject of God's cruelty, we assume God exists. Then, we put him up to his own standards, and find that he is cruel.
In other words, belief in God is plagued by an inconsistency. So another possibility is that God doesn't exist. Not because of morality, but because by its own standards, the belief is found to be inconsistent.

"We had survived to turn on the History Channel
And ask our esteemed panel, Why are we alive? And here's how they replied:
You're what happens when two substances collide
And by all accounts you really should have died."
-Andrew Bird

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by robinrohan, posted 04-03-2006 3:13 PM robinrohan 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