Shyone Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 The pain and suffering on this planet has redemptive purposes. Two eleven-year-old boys in England led a two-year-old boy away from a shopping mall to a nearby trainyard, beat the toddler to death, and left his body on the tracks to be mutilated by the next train through. Tell me exactly how this was redemptive for that two-year-old. I think she meant redemptive for the 11 year olds. The two year old was just a body, but the 11 year olds are much wiser now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev. Dr. Sparki Hooker Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 IMO, it takes being one sick fatherfucker to be able to come up with situations like the two she presented, ESPECIALLY when using them to demonstrate concepts such as redemption and mercy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babylonian Dream Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 Here's a challenge to all of God's critics. If you were God and you had to create beings: 1.Will the beings you create be equal to you or less powerful? Less 2.What degree of free will will you allow to those beings? None, I'd create them for my own selfish purposes. 3.How will you prevent those beings from hurting you, each other and their creation? I hold the controls. 4.What will you do with those beings who break your rules? Such would be impossible. But if it malfunctioned, I'd put it out of use. If you mean life forms, well that would be a different story. They'd still be less powerful, and I would give them free will, and I would (if I was god) try to by making laws and ways for them to get punished if they do wrong. But if they do wrong, if its serious I'll punish them finitely for finite wrongs, and not infinitely for finite wrongs. If its minor, they don't even have to ask, I'll just forgive them, I don't hold grudges. Just a note, I'm not a critic of god either, just like I'm not a dragon's critic, nor Zeus's critic, nor do I criticise Poseidon for raping Medusa, nor Athena for blaming Medusa for her rape. I don't criticise mythological beings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefranden Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 "But I wouldn't treat them like scum like the God of the bible does." Who did God treat like scum? You can't seriously think that your deliberate ignorance is going to impress anyone do you? Or are you really this ignorant? Just in case, here is an example for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mriana Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Darth Vader, Voldemort or Harry Potter are somewhat real; they're really ploys made by the devil in order to detract people from following God. Sorry, this is either a troll, a retard, or maybe both. florduh, the person might really believe it. I have seen Xians who do believe that crap and they are generally the ones who try to get Harry Potter and alike banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoMuso Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 You know, I just had a thought, which I should have thought about long ago: The original poster needs to define "God's Critics". So many of us have said we don't criticize God. I don't either. I just point out that the Xian religion is rewritten mythology and God is a human concept. That does not make me a "God critic". That is two things- religious criticism and comparative religion, both are branches of studies under Religious Studies and something that good Religious scholars, like Bob Price, Joseph Hoffmann, Robert Funk (now dead), and alike, do. So, I think the original poster really needs to define "God's Critics" before this thread goes any further. There is no point in discussing it if we don't know what the person means. This is brilliantly put - yes, I strongly agree. Why do some Christians make the assumption that, because we do not belong to their club, we are automatically "angry with" or "critical of" God? Actually it would be really cool if faeries really existed, but I don't believe they do in the literal sense. This doesn't make me critical of them because they are non-existent. It would also be cool if the philosophical God of love and compassion existed (not the Biblical God, please note, it would be disastrous if He existed) but I He is also non-existent. So in essence we cannot be critical of someone who does not exist. Good point Mriana BTW where has Thumbelina gone? We may have scared her away, which would be sad (even if she is a bit of a troll, it was getting quite entertaining to see what blunderous post she would make next) ... okay, we were getting a bit ad hominum (sorry). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoMuso Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 I have seen Xians who do believe that crap and they are generally the ones who try to get Harry Potter and alike banned. Even though Harry Potter shows more courage, backbone, loyalty, honesty and integrity than most of the characters in the Bible. My ex-wife is one of these types of Christian and she even used to burn our kids toys and books (coz they had demons in them). Seriously screwed up and bordering on insane but sincere none-the-less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agnosticator Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Here's a challenge to all of God's critics. If you were God and you had to create beings: 1.Will the beings you create be equal to you or less powerful? Equal and liberated. 2.What degree of free will will you allow to those beings? Sorry, none for any of you. But they will have wills. 3.How will you prevent those beings from hurting you, each other and their creation? I won't. They will be all females, and they will like S&M. 4.What will you do with those beings who break your rules? Give them the spanking of their lives....in a good way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagnarus Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 This is brilliantly put - yes, I strongly agree. Why do some Christians make the assumption that, because we do not belong to their club, we are automatically "angry with" or "critical of" God? Christians like thumbelina have convinced themselves that the existence of their God and the most likely their interpretation of scripture is self evident, and that thus anyone who doesn't believe as they do must be deliberately ignoring God for whatever selfish reason, it's basically part of their believe system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heathen Monkey Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Here's a challenge to all of God's critics. If you were God and you had to create beings: Will the beings you create be equal to you or less powerful? The beings I create would likely be less powerful -not because that’s what I’d want necessarily but because that seems to be the nature of creation at any level. Despite approximations like Artificial Intelligence or Michelangelo’s “David”, I’ve never seen artists replicate more powerful and fully functional versions of their own species without using genetic material inate to that species. Maybe the Christian god lacked this ability as well, which would explain why we’re such flawed and fragile creatures supposedly only made in his image. What degree of free will will you allow to those beings? For what it’s worth, every man and woman would have the same free will we have now. That is, they’d each be driven by their own subconscious and social conditioning. How will you prevent those beings from hurting you, each other and their creation? Since they'd already have free will, I wouldn’t prevent them from doing anything. That would defeat the purpose of my giving them free will and rob them of the opportunity of learning for themselves what works and what doesn’t. As for my creations hurting me, that would be as impossible as two-dimensional cartoon drawings rising up to smite the artist who rendered them. I’d be inaccessible, invisible, and unfathomable to my creation – much like the god Christians already worship. What will you do with those beings who break your rules? I wouldn’t have to do anything because, just as it is in this world, there’d be natural consequences for each action. Humans would quickly figure out that they couldn’t survive in nature on their own, and they’d make laws to facilitate living together like our own ancestors did. Indeed, cultures all over the world had edicts against murder long before Christianity was invented. The idea that killing one’s tribesmen makes hunting and gathering more difficult is certainly more intuitive than the notion of a three-in-one god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 ... just as it is in this world, there’d be natural consequences for each action. Right on Heathen Monkey. Natural consequences... causality... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b02SihR324A&feature=related Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astreja Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 ...it's not because God is mean but because you cling to sin (anything apart from God). She isn't slandering us, she's just showing that she has an extremely skewed concept of right and wrong... Point conceded. This actually makes her preaching even sillier: She's admitting that her religion is totally divorced from Real Life. This makes it completely useless for those of us who live in the real world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoMuso Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 ...it's not because God is mean but because you cling to sin (anything apart from God). She isn't slandering us, she's just showing that she has an extremely skewed concept of right and wrong... Point conceded. This actually makes her preaching even sillier: She's admitting that her religion is totally divorced from Real Life. This makes it completely useless for those of us who live in the real world. Christians tend to see morality as being a religious duty rather than a social skill. To them, IMO, being moral means believing in and obeying God, but to normal people it means having a positive affect on our environment (cause and effect). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mriana Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 You know, I just had a thought, which I should have thought about long ago: The original poster needs to define "God's Critics". So many of us have said we don't criticize God. I don't either. I just point out that the Xian religion is rewritten mythology and God is a human concept. That does not make me a "God critic". That is two things- religious criticism and comparative religion, both are branches of studies under Religious Studies and something that good Religious scholars, like Bob Price, Joseph Hoffmann, Robert Funk (now dead), and alike, do. So, I think the original poster really needs to define "God's Critics" before this thread goes any further. There is no point in discussing it if we don't know what the person means. This is brilliantly put - yes, I strongly agree. Why do some Christians make the assumption that, because we do not belong to their club, we are automatically "angry with" or "critical of" God? Actually it would be really cool if faeries really existed, but I don't believe they do in the literal sense. This doesn't make me critical of them because they are non-existent. It would also be cool if the philosophical God of love and compassion existed (not the Biblical God, please note, it would be disastrous if He existed) but I He is also non-existent. So in essence we cannot be critical of someone who does not exist. Good point Mriana Thanks BTW, I am convinced faeries are pre-angel and some even became angels, just as the pre-Xian gods and goddesses became saints and demons. I have seen Xians who do believe that crap and they are generally the ones who try to get Harry Potter and alike banned. Even though Harry Potter shows more courage, backbone, loyalty, honesty and integrity than most of the characters in the Bible. My ex-wife is one of these types of Christian and she even used to burn our kids toys and books (coz they had demons in them). Seriously screwed up and bordering on insane but sincere none-the-less. I have relatives like that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 ...it's not because God is mean but because you cling to sin (anything apart from God). She isn't slandering us, she's just showing that she has an extremely skewed concept of right and wrong... Point conceded. This actually makes her preaching even sillier: She's admitting that her religion is totally divorced from Real Life. This makes it completely useless for those of us who live in the real world. Even sincere delusion doesn't trump reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnceConvinced Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 I just have to comment some more on this freewill issue. (I know I'm no doubt wasting my breath as the delusion is strong with Thumb). My ideas I came up with would not turn humans into robots or puppets, it would just prevent them from the desire to commit evil acts. I actually find it quite disturbing that Thumbalina would demand the option to commit attrocities if she so wishes. She would like to have the option to murder, torture, maim, destroy, have sex with animals and children, eat human flesh, etc etc. She may not do those things, but she considers it vitally important that she has those options and the freewill to carry them out if she so wishes. It's people like this that make me even more convinced that if God is real he was very malevolent, or at the very least incompetent when he designed human life. If Thumbalina is the example of what total freewill is all about, I am scared for anyone she comes into contact with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoMuso Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Even sincere delusion doesn't trump reality. Yup. And the trouble with sincere delusion is that the person who is deluded thinks it's reality - really actually thinks so. If Thumbalina is the example of what total freewill is all about, I am scared for anyone she comes into contact with. I agree, but cannot help feeling compassion - because - there, but for the grace of Truth, go I (I too was an evangelical Christian and believed I was actually doing good by witnessing to "the lost" - deluded but sincere). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Captain Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Tummy rot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoMuso Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Tummy rot! Sincere tummy rot is tummy rot none-the-less! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Tummy rot! Sincere tummy rot is tummy rot none-the-less! But oh so fun to say! Tummy rot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoMuso Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 But oh so fun to say! Tummy rot. So if a rotting tummy could make Tommy's tummy rot, would a tummy-rotting tummy rot? Hey - you're right, it is fun to say. Poppycock also has it's merits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Tummy rot! When I read that, I thought of intestinal ischemia and infarction. I guess I'm too literal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heathen Monkey Posted March 14, 2010 Share Posted March 14, 2010 Right on Heathen Monkey. Natural consequences... causality... Isn't it annoying when Christians suggest that being condemned to Hell is a natural consequence of not accepting salvation -as if their god's hands are tied? I actually had to remind a Christian that her god created Hell in the first place because she tried to equate the threat of eternal torture with a father warning his child against playing in traffic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoMuso Posted March 14, 2010 Share Posted March 14, 2010 Isn't it annoying when Christians suggest that being condemned to Hell is a natural consequence of not accepting salvation -as if their god's hands are tied? I actually had to remind a Christian that her god created Hell in the first place because she tried to equate the threat of eternal torture with a father warning his child against playing in traffic. Yup. And what they also don't get is that their God demands the shedding of innocent blood before He is willing to forgive us. It's like one of us asking our kids to kill the family pet and pour its blood out onto a little altar before we forgive them for bunking school last week Wednesday. "You failed Math this term? Right, your kitten goes, oh ... and throw in your hamster for being rude to your mother. Go now ... I want innocent blood Bwuhahahah." They just don't get it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts