Post 4618200 - (Got a problem with God Fire away)

WP Members: > 70,000

New Today: 9
New Yesterday: 30

Got a problem with God Fire away

Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next

Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index -> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Phoenix

Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3726
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject:

LiendaBalla wrote:

AngelRho wrote:

Yes, but the problem is that you really aren't all that interested in any explanations. You're too preoccupied with hating Christians and rationalizing your hateful attitude by pulling your favorite Bible misquotes. You'll never even begin to understand what Jesus was all about if you can't release your grip on your own hateful prejudices.

Do you believe that the word "Atheist" and the word "Agnostic" are totally different from each other? I had a sudden curious urge to ask.

Personally, yes, I do. I catch myself using them interchangeably sometimes. The reason why I might have fallen into that habit is that there are two schools of atheistic thought--one that says "There is no God" and the other that says "I do not believe there is a God." The latter of the two I have difficulty accepting as legitimately atheist since it still allows for the possibility of God and is more properly an agnostic position that leans towards atheism.

I don't recall who coined the term--Sam Harris, maybe?--"anti-theist," but that's a neologism that seems more appropriate to me in describing many (not all, but many) adopting either atheistic/pseudo-atheistic position or agnostic position but also have the distinction of being vehemently anti-religion. It's an apt descriptor I chose in regard of abacacus, who I also suspect wears the same label with pride.

But as to two different words with two different meanings? Absolutely.

abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Phoenix

Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3322

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 6:39 pm Post subject:

AngelRho wrote:

I am perfectly willing to accept an explanation that is reasonable, well supported (by logic, known historical facts, or both), and not dependant on less-than-reliable religious stories.

Your explanation essentially amounted to "cultural differences made it okay! You're just close minded!" I am NOT willing to accept that, because it has nothing behind it to make me think it could be the truth. There isn't enough substance there for me to even go off and do some of my own research to see if I'm wrong.

Also, I don't hate christians, I hate christianity. There is a difference.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.

abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Phoenix

Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3322

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 7:18 pm Post subject:

AngelRho wrote:

Just noticed this post.

I do wear the anti-theist label with pride. I know I fit in to it quite well, and I am not ashamed of that.

I am wondering which atheist "school" you would put me in by the way (curiosity, I'd like to know how I come off on people):
I firmly believe that there is no god or gods, but I am also willing to be proved wrong and accept being wrong if such evidence should arise (however unlikely it may be).
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.

soutthpaw
Snowy Owl

Joined: May 01, 2012
Age: 42
Posts: 151

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 7:29 pm Post subject:

AngelRho wrote:

I wish you would stop using the same argument against every Atheist. The reason you don't explain is because you do not have any logical and reasonable answers that would make any sense at all to an Atheist. your explanations exist purely in Faith. I challange you now to explain and answer this
"Cultural differences do not explain how being blamed for the sins of two people during the origin of the human race is fair. Cultural differences do not make it okay to kill people in barbaric ways. That's like saying we don't understand what was going on in peoples heads during the Rwandan genocide so we should just believe it was fair and merciful for people to get hacked apart in the streets with machetes, something your god would have been over joyed to see."
_________________
AQ test =36: SQ test = 110: EQ test =8
Aspire quiz: Aspire score = 162; Neurotypical =42
RAADS=173 Total: Language= 10: social relatedness= 92: Sensory/motor= 37: Circumscribed interests=34

Evinceo
Deinonychus

Joined: Apr 14, 2012
Posts: 386

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 7:57 pm Post subject:

I don't think the culture thing means that it was literally okay to murder hundreds of people because they worshiped a golden calf. I think he means that they would write that because that's what they wrote back then-in Rwanda they literally hacked people to death, but again there's no archeological evidence that Moses was a war criminal. People seem to debate this sort of thing not against each other, but against a favorite straw man. Most Christians don't read the OT and think "wow, I love the part where Moses is mad because his soldiers left some of the women and children alive." Most Atheists don't have a burning hatred of Christians. As for God being overjoyed to see people killed in the streets, it would probably depend on who's doing the killing and who's being killed, which you might argue is the critical flaw in the OT's moral.

abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Phoenix

Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3322

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 8:06 pm Post subject:

Evinceo wrote:

I don't think the culture thing means that it was literally okay to murder hundreds of people because they worshiped a golden calf. I think he means that they would write that because that's what they wrote back then-in Rwanda they literally hacked people to death, but again there's no archeological evidence that Moses was a war criminal.

People seem to debate this sort of thing not against each other, but against a favorite straw man. Most Christians don't read the OT and think "wow, I love the part where Moses is mad because his soldiers left some of the women and children alive." Most Atheists don't have a burning hatred of Christians.

As for God being overjoyed to see people killed in the streets, it would probably depend on who's doing the killing and who's being killed, which you might argue is the critical flaw in the OT's moral.

3'rd paragraph: I would argue that it doesn't matter who is being killed and who is doing the killing. God of peace and love, remember? Not some barbaric war god like Ares/Mars or any other of the vast number of non-christian deities (or even gods portrayal in Islam). I would further argue that it would be blatantly immoral to enjoy or promote murder, even for a deity, which lowers his podium quite a few notches from the "all perfect, all loving" deity that christians tend to try and sell him as.

2'nd paragraph: Point yours for the most part.

1'st paragraph: There is no archaeological evidence of plenty of biblical events, however if the bible is accepted as true then the history it contains must also be true, no? Which would mean that Moses was indeed a war criminal.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.

TellEmSteveDave
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: Apr 09, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 272
Location: Equestria/Ooo

Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:23 pm Post subject:

abacacus wrote:

I don't hate christians, I hate christianity. There is a difference.

Same, I think christianity is BS, but that doesn't mean I hate christians. My family are christians but I still love them!

Evinceo
Deinonychus

Joined: Apr 14, 2012
Posts: 386

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 12:34 am Post subject:

abacacus wrote:

Try and guess how many lines there are between

You shall not murder.

and

Then he said to them, 'This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor.'

(Hint: Both are from Exodus)

But again, this does come back to practical matters-that is people using the OT God's intolerance of basically anything* as a justification for their own bigotry. If you look at the stories of the ancient Israelites and see "wow, these stories of hope are very inspirational" that's one thing. But if you read them and say "wow, God thinks that we should stone gays and adulterers and witches... shucks I hate all of those things too" then something is very, very wrong.

*(Even Moses wasn't up to his standards. Are you better than Moses?)

abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Phoenix

Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3322

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 1:03 am Post subject:

I was being somewhat sarcastic. Trust me, I know just how bloodthirsty the christian god is. Am I better than Moses? Hell yes I am. I'm not going to go slaughter people because silly little voice in my skull told me too. I have a measure of self control he obviously didn't. _________________ A shot gun blast into the face of deceit You'll gain your just reward. We'll not rest until the purge is complete You will reap what you've sown.

AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Phoenix

Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3726
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 1:10 am Post subject:

soutthpaw wrote:

AngelRho wrote:

Every atheist? I haven't seen that many atheists on here act quite that aggressively hateful.

As far as logical/reasonable answers--logical proofs of God and defenses of Christianity have been around for centuries. I wouldn't mind taking time out to try to convince someone that Yahweh is God and Jesus is Messiah, but I'd much rather spend that time with someone who really is seeking the Truth than wasting with someone who is only interested in picking a fight. If you don't want to believe, nothing I say nor any amount of evidence is going to convince you.

I'll put it this way: Suppose you were talking to a creationist who denied Big Bang. While it is still true that scientists are still trying to figure out exactly how it all went down, they still accept that something did happen. If someone were to stand up and outright dismiss Big Bang theory, the scientific community would instantly label them and alternative explanations as crackpottery. But suppose also that the creationist defended his position against Big Bang theory using exactly the same evidence that Big Bang proponents use to prove their case. All he'd have to do is offer an alternative that simply interprets the available data differently. So who would be right, the creationist or the Big Bangers? Same evidence, different conclusions. What makes one interpretation of data superior to another? And, most importantly, would Big Bangers likely be persuaded by the creationist's interpretation? My guess is that Big Bang theorists wouldn't even entertain the possibility that the creationist could be right.

Now, take the discussion we're having here. To a Christian who has a personal relationship with Yahweh and recognizes the influence of the Holy Spirit in his life, God, Jesus, and the Bible (among other truths) appear to be self-evident. No alternative explanation you can offer is going to be good enough. The idea that there is no God is utterly foreign to that person, just like the idea that there was never a Big Bang is utterly foreign to a cosmologist.

Your challenge is not much of a challenge. The key to the challenge is the underlying hidden assumption that human understanding is superior to God's understanding. Judgment is being passed on God for what He instructed His people to do. Cultural differences do not make it OK to kill in barbaric ways, but it does help a modern-day observer understand how and why things in the past happened the way they did. You can't expect someone in the ancient world to apply lethal injection to a convicted murderer. The methods by which the guilty would be put to death are unfortunately the ones available. Perhaps our progeny will look at our methods of capital punishment and wonder at how barbaric they are in light of the improvements in putting criminals to death one might see at a future time. Many of the OT laws take into account the sinful nature of each human being--not condoning certain behaviors such as sex slavery, but rather understanding that those things exist within the culture and must be dealt with. Involuntary servitude for non-criminals is not condoned, nor is it condemned in the OT. But laws concerning the treatment of slaves were given because at the time the wickedness of mankind drew mankind to procure and trade other human beings as property. OT laws actually do offer certain types of slaves relief from the abuse of an owner and a certain amount of protected status and privilege, the intent being to contrast the Israelites' experience as a slave class within Egypt.

And so to answer your "challenge," I have to point out that slavery has been virtually eliminated everywhere Christians and Jews have had a significant influence. It's remarkable that the quote you included has "...something your god would have been over joyed to see." Such a statement indicates that the person saying it doesn't have much of a good knowledge of the OT nor any kind of understanding of Hebraic or Christian thought. There is a preoccupation with what one person believes are negative aspects of the religion and scripture. There is an outright refusal to even try to understand what's there and how it applies to the lives of the faithful. It's not an argument worth putting the time and energy into. It's almost as bad as getting into an argument with a child--as soon as you engage a contentious child whose self-centered rejection of all usual mature reasoning causes him to reject even the most impassioned plea, you have already lost. The only way I win arguments consistently with my 3 and 4 yo's is by imposing my will upon them and demanding compliance. Mature adults shouldn't be expected to strong-arm each other in discussions, and I'm not going to go out of my way to convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced.

Given that I suspect you really aren't all that interested in what I have to say, how about a counter-challenge? Try to convince me that the alternative is superior.

AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Phoenix

Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3726
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 1:20 am Post subject:

Evinceo wrote:

abacacus wrote:

I'll have to look that up. Smile

Good stuff. I'd also like to point out that the command from the Lord to kill isn't murder since murder is defined as a specific form of killing. Killing in a state of war, as an example, cannot be considered murder. Very often "Do not murder" is selectively translated as "Do not kill." If we're talking about Exodus, we're talking about a crucial time in the formation of the nation of Israel in which actions against God would have been seen as rebellion and treachery that could have quickly torn the young nation apart before it could ever really get off the ground as an independent nation. Zero-tolerance would have been necessary for the Hebraic theocracy during that stage of their existence. In actual practice, the Israelites failed to maintain it and ultimately had to suffer the same vengeance from the Babylonians that they (the Israelites) inflicted upon the natives of Canaan during the period of the judges.

Evinceo
Deinonychus

Joined: Apr 14, 2012
Posts: 386

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 1:49 am Post subject:

AngelRho wrote:

If we're talking about Exodus, we're talking about a crucial time in the formation of the nation of Israel in which actions against God would have been seen as rebellion and treachery that could have quickly torn the young nation apart before it could ever really get off the ground as an independent nation. Zero-tolerance would have been necessary for the Hebraic theocracy during that stage of their existence. In actual practice, the Israelites failed to maintain it and ultimately had to suffer the same vengeance from the Babylonians that they (the Israelites) inflicted upon the natives of Canaan during the period of the judges.

So in the eyes of the storyteller, the sacrifice of, say, three thousand men isn't too much to save the nation of Isreal. In the context of the story (being about Isreal and all) it makes sense, but it's also an example of the kind of rationalizations that actual real life killers (sometimes) use, which is probably where abacacus is coming from when he says that God would be happy to see killing in the streets. Incidentally, I doubt that Homer actually wanted to see every jealous husband massacre his wife's suitors, but I'll be darned if his climax to the Odyssey wasn't epic.

abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Phoenix

Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3322

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 2:44 am Post subject:

It is essentially where I was coming from. To a humans eyes, yes such a sacrifice could easily be rationalized, for many reasons. From an OMNIPOTENT GOD WHO CLAIMS TO BE ALL LOVING AND PERFECT? Not so much. Think about it. Omnipotent and all powerful. Claims he loves us all. Proceeds to not bat an eye when thousands of us are killed. Doesn't make much sense. There are reasons I continuously go off on the steaming pile that is the bible. _________________ A shot gun blast into the face of deceit You'll gain your just reward. We'll not rest until the purge is complete You will reap what you've sown.

AngelRho
Synclavier owner/operator
Phoenix

Joined: Jan 05, 2008
Posts: 3726
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 6:16 am Post subject:

Evinceo wrote:

AngelRho wrote:

Odyssey was truly awesome.

I really do understand the objections when it comes to all the death and destruction. But the main problem I have with those objections is how terribly one-sided they are. ONLY the human perspective is in mind. If we take into account that our knowledge is limited and God's knowledge is infinite, then we have to accept that things are handled differently than we would handle them due to things we don't know or understand.

I'm also noticing a strong false dichotomy between a God of peace and love and a God of vengeance and wrath. I tend to think our God is God of everything to include the things we don't like as well as the things we do like. My attitude for the purpose of this discussion is there's not much point in trying to convince someone whose mind is already made up and will use any kind of rationalization that suits his purpose to maintain such a hateful outlook. It doesn't make sense to that observer because he doesn't WANT it to make sense. One of the key differences between us is that I'm open to accepting the fact that God doesn't need my approval in order to act as He sees fit to provide the ultimate greatest good for us in this world.

LiendaBalla
Phoenix
Phoenix

Joined: Oct 24, 2007
Age: 34
Posts: 2857

Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 11:35 am Post subject:

Why did Moses spend four months in the mountain if God swiftly made the letters appear in the stone slabs?

Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index -> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next

Forums ©

Read more Articles on Wrong Planet

Wrong Planet is a Registered Trademark.
Copyright 2004-2013, Wrong Planet, LLC and Alex Plank. Alex does public speaking for Autism.

Advertise on Wrong Planet

Wrong Planet News Wrong Planet Forums