Would You Ever Submit And Worship God

[◊ crazyguy123 ◊]

 

 

 

What child in their right mind would hate their parent for telling them not to drink and drive.

 

 

 

A more accurate analogy would be an absentee parent who deliberately programmed the child with an overwhelming desire to drink and drive, then when the intentionally imperfect child does the inevitable, the parent comes into town, sets the kid on fire and blames the kid. After all, the child had the choice to go against his parent-given nature and obey the contrary written command of a parent he's never seen or heard.

 

First, It's absurd to think that because someone has an inclination to do something that they don't deserve punishment for their actions. I don't believe for a second you live that philosophy in real life. Second, Inclinations do not translate into inevitable actions. There are enormous numbers of people with the same backgrounds as those on this site. The same back stories that do love and worship God. Thirdly, even when we do act on those inclinations the ability to avoid the consequences is freely available.

 

 

When a person does something terrible that they can not stop themselves from doing, they do not deserve punishment and I do not know of a civilized person who thinks that. Barbaric people would believe a person like that would need to be punished, especially the punishment of being set on fire and tortured. What a person like that needs is help. They need psychiatric treatment that will hopefully stop them from not being able to stop themselves from doing something terrible again.

 

Also, even if people did not live that philosophy in real life, so what? Shouldn't a perfect and all-powerful god live that philosophy? Apparently yours doesn't because it's just as barbaric and imperfect as the people who created it.

[bdp]

Yes, I did mean willingly.

 

Given that no one would willingly submit and worship Him given evidence it is clear all the talk about evidence is just a psychological crutch. I think a reasonable interpretation is that anti Christian "evidence talk" is just a way of comforting themselves. There is a deep need to convince themselves that He does not exist.

 

There is no evidence. 

[seeker001]

 

If we are the children of God and, wouldn't God want us to stand on our own two feet and reach our true potential without his intervention? Isn't it selfish to continue to rely on him when we can solve our problems on our own? As adults we can't continue to rely on our parents, eventually we do need to support ourselves and find our own ways. You can call it pride, but I refer to it as being self-sufficient.

 

Perhaps He knows more than we do just as normal parents realize they know more than their child. Perhaps He knows we cannot achieve anything but an illusion of self sufficiency with out His guidance and help. Perhaps He knows we are the creation and He is the Creator.

 

for "All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, (1Pe 1:24)

 

 

 

You seem to be dodging my point that normal parents do not require worship only respect, and parents want their children to surpass them. To live a better life than they did.

 

I've reached a point where I consider myself equal to my parents. True, I still have a lot to learn about life since I'm only 21, but I don't need my parents constantly looking over my shoulders. Yes, there was a point where I was completely dependent on them, but I am an adult now. True, they may have more life experience than I do, but I'm no longer completely reliant on them. They may help me out with some things, but they don't require worship out of me only respect. 

 

On your other post, no I haven't heard of natural theology. I'll check it out later, do you have a good link to information about it.

[bdp]

 A child who goes into the world believing they are God is a fool.

 

 

 

I'm not god, but there also is no god beyond the temporal.  This isn't an either/or scenario as you'd like it to be.

[Deva]

 

 

 

 

 

Only if I were on the precipice of hell and God was getting ready to shove me in.Then it would be forced, wouldn't it?

 

Otherwise, some form of brain damage.

 

Anyway, I follow the Dharma. 

Where is dharma leading you?

 

 

What do you know of the Dharma? If we are not speaking the same language, we can't communicate.

 

Teach those who are reading.

 

Many Buddhist texts speak of the qualifications of the teacher, as well as the student.   I don't put myself forth as a teacher, but what I have learned is satisfactory to me.  

 

As a student, you have to be willing to be open to learning and seeing different points of view.  Unfortunately, I don't see evidence in what you have posted that you have this openness.

 

So you claim to follow dharma but either can't or are unwilling to explain it to anyone reading this thread.

 

Yes I do. But, its not my obligation or choice to explain it.  I am not a teacher and you are no student.

 

If you want to know about it, you can research it yourself.  As it is, the subject is off topic for this thread, since it has nothing to do with worshiping God.

[bdp]

Yes, it did occur to me. It seems anti Christians engage in a deep form of selection bias where they focus in on, dwell on, obsess over that which they are able to interpret in their own minds as justification for their pre-existing vitriol. They ignore the deep and everlasting Love God freely offers. I don't believe for a minute any anti Christian cares one whit about what happened to the Canaanites. They do care about how to cast the God they hate in a bad light through careful and obsessive selection.

 

 

This is bullshit - you're just not HEARING us and you don't WANT to hear us.  We aren't even REAL to you.  How can I. or anyone, 'hate' a being they simply can't believe actually exists?  That is possible, you know, to examine everything that is supposed to suffice as 'evidence' and come to the honest conclusion that it is simply lacking and that 'god' is a complete impossibility on every single level.  Ignore 'the deep and everlasting love' one just can't accept as real and true?  Your bible is nothing but mythology to me - to talk of hate and rejection is just as absurd to me as talking of hating and rejecting 'the force' in Star Wars.  You just don't get it, and it's really very sad.

[bdp]

 

Only if I were on the precipice of hell and God was getting ready to shove me in.Then it would be forced, wouldn't it?

 

Otherwise, some form of brain damage.

 

Anyway, I follow the Dharma. 

Where is dharma leading you?

 

Why does anything have to 'lead' anywhere?

[bdp]

 

 

 

Why would polytheism seem more rational to you?

 

 

Why is monotheism rational to you?  Answer without reference to the Bible.

 

I have answered. Everyone here struts around acting like they were former "apologists" and Bible "experts" so they must know the Christian arguments by heart.

 

Please don't deflect the question. We all know the elephant in the room is that polytheism is treated with kid gloves on this site. Endless rants are given about "evidence" yet polytheism is openly embraced here. As I said, it seems evidence is a red herring and the true goal is simply anti Christianity in any and all forms.

 

 

Polytheists aren't arrogant asses who come here to insult us.  I for one don't believe in polytheism or any other theism but I have no problem with polytheists or any other theists who are respectful and interested in respectful dialogue.  You aren't - none of us is a true individual, a genuine human being to you, just a cardboard cutout for you to throw your darts at.

[boftx]

In response to an earlier remark by OC that indicates that he might have recognized that he has at least the potential to be an asshole, I offer the following from a discussion in an area that  I'm not sure that he is able to access:

 

 

 

To those who recognize their asshole-ness: Acceptance is the first step on the road to recovery.

 

The 12 Steps of Assholism of Ex-c......

 

Step 1. I admitted that I was a complete asshole and my life has become totally unmanageable because of my big mouth on Ex-c.

Step 2. Came to believe that an Ex-c, 'non-asshole' member could restore me to sanity.

Step 3. Made a decision to  turn my life over to the care of the 'non-asshole's' on Ex-c.

Step 4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of myself as an asshole.

Step 5. Admitted to all the 'non-asshole' members on Ex-c, and to myself, the exact nature of my assholism.

Step 6. Was entirely ready to have the 'non-assholes' on Ex-c remove all these defects of character.

Step 7.  Humbly asked the 'non-assholes on Ex-c to  help me remove my shortcomings as a recovering asshole and to forgive me.

Step 8. Made a list of all the 'non-asshole' members of Ex-c I had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all, before calling them assholes again.

Step 9. Made direct amends to the 'non-assholes' on Ex-c, wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them again by calling them an asshole.

Step 10. Continued to take personal inventory of my assholism and when I was  acting like an asshole, promptly admitted it.

Step 11. Sought help through the 'non assholes' of Ex-c,  to improve my conscious contact with my assholism , asking only for their knowledge of how to defeat assholism and to give me the power to carry that out.

Step 12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, I tried to carry this message to other assholes on Ex-c and to practice my new

'non assholism'  in all my affairs on Ex-c.

 

 

 

 

[bdp]

 

There is substantial and significant evidence for God outside the Bible.

...no there isn't.  But if there were it doesn't automatically translate to 'Xtianity is real.'  There is more than enough evidence to show that Xtianity is false.

[raoul]

 

 

 

 

 

Only if I were on the precipice of hell and God was getting ready to shove me in.Then it would be forced, wouldn't it?

 

Otherwise, some form of brain damage.

 

Anyway, I follow the Dharma. 

Where is dharma leading you?

 

 

What do you know of the Dharma? If we are not speaking the same language, we can't communicate.

 

Teach those who are reading.

 

Many Buddhist texts speak of the qualifications of the teacher, as well as the student.   I don't put myself forth as a teacher, but what I have learned is satisfactory to me.  

 

As a student, you have to be willing to be open to learning and seeing different points of view.  Unfortunately, I don't see evidence in what you have posted that you have this openness.

 

So you claim to follow dharma but either can't or are unwilling to explain it to anyone reading this thread.

 

She doesn't have to explain it to us - she's one of us and we accept and respect her and many of us, including me, consider her a friend. That's kinda like that xtian fellowship you're supposed to be practicing with the other loonie tunes in your church, isn't it?

[florduh]

 

 

 

What child in their right mind would hate their parent for telling them not to drink and drive.

 

 

 

A more accurate analogy would be an absentee parent who deliberately programmed the child with an overwhelming desire to drink and drive, then when the intentionally imperfect child does the inevitable, the parent comes into town, sets the kid on fire and blames the kid. After all, the child had the choice to go against his parent-given nature and obey the contrary written command of a parent he's never seen or heard.

 

First, It's absurd to think that because someone has an inclination to do something that they don't deserve punishment for their actions. I don't believe for a second you live that philosophy in real life. Second, Inclinations do not translate into inevitable actions. There are enormous numbers of people with the same backgrounds as those on this site. The same back stories that do love and worship God. Thirdly, even when we do act on those inclinations the ability to avoid the consequences is freely available.

 

Not surprisingly, you missed my point entirely. 

 

The only value in engaging you is that lurkers may see the critically unchallenged belief that a Christian has in an unjust deity and also the responses of those who have actually thought about and investigated the claims of the religion.

 

 

Endless rants are given about "evidence" yet polytheism is openly embraced here.

 

 

 

To be fair, that is one of my peeves, too. A large majority who are ex-Christian have dismissed the belief for lack of evidence. If that was the case, it seems rather disingenuous to embrace other supernatural ideas without evidence. There are others, though, who still have a low standard of evidence and have left the religion for other reasons. The version of god we are all most familiar with is easy to dismiss after a little study and application of logic; some still hold out hope for other kinds of gods, creative forces, etc. that at least do not have the violent history and schizophrenia of the Bible god. Yet others acknowledge certain deities as focal points and symbols and they don't for a moment assert they actually exist outside of the mythic realm. A key difference with people you may label polytheists and Christians is that the polytheists, pagans, Hindus or Buddhists never try to push the beliefs they personally find useful onto someone else, and of course, they don't threaten anyone with eternal torture for disagreeing with them.

 

No, Clay, I don't expect to make any sense to you. But as I said, someone without a brainwashed and closed mind may read these exchanges.

[raoul]

 

 

There is substantial and significant evidence for God outside the Bible.

...no there isn't.  But if there were it doesn't automatically translate to 'Xtianity is real.'  There is more than enough evidence to show that Xtianity is false.

 

Sorry but you're going to have to write down the entire 2 or 3 hundred thousand pieces of evidence showing its false. He'll ignore every single one of them but you still gotta do it because he wants you to do it. lol

[raoul]

 The only value in engaging you is that lurkers may see the critically unchallenged belief that a Christian has in an unjust deity and also the responses of those who have actually thought about and investigated the claims of the religion

 

Florduh, that's what I have to keep repeating over and over to myself whenever I engage them elsewhere. But damn, it's so freaking frustrating and hard at times to keep my cool, especially when I see the semantical games they play.

[par4dcourse]

Actually, that is reasonable with the caveat that proof outside mathematics and logic is really a collection of evidence which upon reaching a certain threshold will convince us of something.

There is no proof outside math and logic. You are arguing that belief trumps reality.

 

As I said, it seems evidence is a red herring and the true goal is simply anti Christianity in any and all forms.

 

Well DUH.! What gave us away, Dick Tracy, the big masthead that says "Ex-Christian.net"?

[♦ ficino ♦]

 

OC, I predicted to BAA that you'd ignore all the points recently made to you on this site and would disappear for a while, only to return as though nothing had been said.  Yep, you've done exactly that.

 

I submit to human authorities, to the needs created by various human situations, in the generality of my life.  I'm not against submission as such.  I am against "submitting" to people who propound false claims.  There isn't any way of "submitting to" or worshiping the God you promote except by also accepting the Bible as true.  Since the Bible contains many contradictions and absurdities, it can't be accepted as true.  So we don't even get to the stage of talking about submitting to and worshiping the god figure that is depicted in that book.

 

If I were to return to religion it would be to Buddhism or, if it's possible for a Westerner, some form of Hinduism, or neo-Platonism, which is like a religion in many ways.

I did respond. I have not responded to your repetition in some cases. I predict baa and yourself will repeat yourselves yet again and claim new revelation.

 

The eastern religions are revelation based spiritual paths. So you admit revelation is a satisfactory source of truth?

 

You responded by repeating things you've said before.  You have not, for starters, proved that the Bible teaches "free will."  You have only quoted verses where someone is presented with a choice or where God punishes/rewards.  Those verses are compatible both with Calvinism and with Molinism (I gather you subscribe to the latter).  To deny that they are compatible with Calvinism requires the believing Christian to demonstrate this incompatibility from scripture, not merely to assert, as you do, that choices and consequences imply free will.  Such an assertion rests on the very assumptions that Calvinism, based on the bible, denies, so it's a petitio.

 

I leave it to BAA to discuss the multiverse.

 

You are equivocating on "revelation" or else using it in your first instance in a way that contributes nothing to discussion.

 

You are off base if you think Hinduism and Buddhism are revelation-based.

 

In answer to your last question:  I admit no such thing, and I have given no reason for thinking that I do.

 

With all the above said, I agree that your OP raised a worthwhile question.  It's worth it for an unbeliever to consider, under what conditions he/she would believe, or worship.  Your OP was couched w/ ref. to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, so in that case, I said that I find the question a non-starter because one gets tipped into a book that contains contradictions.  Therefore the OP is a little like (not identical to) asking someone what it would take to get them to believe in a square triangle.  

[florduh]

You are arguing that belief trumps reality.

 

 

 

For a True Believer (and not just Christian believers), faith or unfounded (by any normal definition) belief does indeed trump all facts and evidence to the contrary. Logic always loses to faith in these instances. It gets frustrating, no?

[centauri]

It seems anti Christians engage in a deep form of selection bias where they focus in on, dwell on, obsess over that which they are able to interpret in their own minds as justification for their pre-existing vitriol. They ignore the deep and everlasting Love God freely offers. I don't believe for a minute any anti Christian cares one whit about what happened to the Canaanites. They do care about how to cast the God they hate in a bad light through careful and obsessive selection.

Christians practice selection bias on a much more aggressive scale.

They select the version  of "God" that appeals most to them and then assert to all others that their version is the official God, and that it exists because they say so.

They obsess on this to the point of sermonizing at any opportunity.

 

Also, the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob was not a "Trinity", which is the most popular Christian version of God.

This "God" you speak of is a hypothetical construct loosely based on the writings of ancient tribal people.

 

The Christian God does not give everlasting love freely.

That's a popular Christian lie and should be ignored because it's dishonest false advertising.

If a person fails to react properly and worship this God, the so-called "free" love is taken away and replaced with damnation and wrath.

The love is merely conditional, not unlike a dog that receives a treat if it responds correctly.

 

The issue of Canaanites is not if non-Christians care about them but that Christians proclaim God is "love" and then steadfastly ignore the obvious Biblical refutation of that claim.

[RipVanWinkle]

OC: You must first show that your god exists in order to legitimately ask if we would worship him? You can never do that because there is no evidence that he does.

 

If you really mean to ask whether we would ever worship an evil god, you got your answer. If that is

not your question, your question does not make sense because THAT god of the OT is clearly evil if one reads the bible by literally interpreting the languages in the accepted way, rather than stretching the

language to mean something else altogether.

 

First demonstrate that your god could some how be worthy of worship even in view of his cruelty and acts of terror repeatedly done in the OT. For just one example, explain why the creator god, always

knowing in advance what is going to happen, created humans, only to drown every living one of them

(babies and all,)except one family, who was as corrupt as the ones he drowned?

 

Would YOU worship an evil god? Do you actually think that the god of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is

good and worthy of worship? If so, how can a "good" god justify condemning the entire human race before they were even born because A and E supposedly ate a forbidden fruit, which god knew they would eat

before he created them? Why not create humans who were capable of living up to god's standards? If you think free will was the obstacle, why give free will to humans? Or why create humans at all since god

knew the ultimate result would be his sending the vast majority to be tortured in eternal hell, and

since that suffering was totally unnecessary? After all, he didn't have to create humans. Why have

people tortured forever if he didn't have to? Is god so insecure that he needs to have a small

percentage of humans bow down before him forever even if to do so requires torturing the remainder of

humans in hell forever? Or did he do this just for the fun of it?

 

THOSE ARE SOME THE REAL ISSUES OC! YOUR TRICK QUESTION CAN GET YOU NOWHERE. You asked your question

so you could tell others or convince yourself that exchristians would not worship your god under any

conditions. But you specified the god of the old testament in your question. That limits our options in thousands of ways. You have to clean your god up somehow before expecting any reasonable person to

worship him. bill

[Thurisaz]

 

 

Tell us about polytheism.

Why would I? You wouldn't listen anyway - at "best" you'd scan my posting for keywords and babble the preprogrammed response that was fucked into (whatever passes for) your brain by your cult führer.

 

You are a gem mein freund. I'm reading your note with the quote by someone called 'fuckface' and I'm saying who the hell is this fuckface? I never heard of him/her before? And then the lights came one. ROFL

 

Heh

 

I'd like to claim this was genuinely my idea, alas, someone of the oldtimers of this site did similar things years ago. Every now and then I just copy the feat

[Guest r3alchild]

 

It seems anti Christians engage in a deep form of selection bias where they focus in on, dwell on, obsess over that which they are able to interpret in their own minds as justification for their pre-existing vitriol. They ignore the deep and everlasting Love God freely offers. I don't believe for a minute any anti Christian cares one whit about what happened to the Canaanites. They do care about how to cast the God they hate in a bad light through careful and obsessive selection.

Christians practice selection bias on a much more aggressive scale.

They select the version of "God" that appeals most to them and then assert to all others that their version is the official God, and that it exists because they say so.

They obsess on this to the point of sermonizing at any opportunity.

 

Also, the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob was not a "Trinity", which is the most popular Christian version of God.

This "God" you speak of is a hypothetical construct loosely based on the writings of ancient tribal people.

 

The Christian God does not give everlasting love freely.

That's a popular Christian lie and should be ignored because it's dishonest false advertising.

If a person fails to react properly and worship this God, the so-called "free" love is taken away and replaced with damnation and wrath.

The love is merely conditional, not unlike a dog that receives a treat if it responds correctly.

 

The issue of Canaanites is not if non-Christians care about them but that Christians proclaim God is "love" and then steadfastly ignore the obvious Biblical refutation of that claim.

Its all about those dog treats or god treats. I think I just woke up a bit more.

[sdelsolray]

 

You are arguing that belief trumps reality.

 

 

 

For a True Believer (and not just Christian believers), faith or unfounded (by any normal definition) belief does indeed trump all facts and evidence to the contrary. Logic always loses to faith in these instances. It gets frustrating, no?

 

 

The typical lies, misrepresentations, logical fallacies and disingenuousness put forth by these adamant theists, of which OC is but one example, are quite expected.  As such, little new ground is plowed and what is left is just further empirical evidence of the repetitiveness of this behavior.  I find it more interesting, these days, to explore why these people act and behave as they do.  What psychological and emotional needs drive them to such irrationality?  How much do childhood indoctrination, peer pressure, fear and/or laziness affect their psychological, emotional and mental health?  What brain chemistry is involved and is it genetically based?

[Thurisaz]

Well I see fuckface has stopped replying to my postings. I'll consider that as clear a confession of defeat as a morontheist will ever give.

Fuckface's entirety of postings in here proves (to me) the opinion I formed quite some time ago once more - namely that while "we non- or ex-fanatics" operate on a desire for logic, truth and reason, a morontheist only cares for authority. As long as (insert claim here) is said by the right führer, a morontheist will mindlessly regurgibabble it any chance it gets. It is the concept we call "Kadavergehorsam" over here, literally "cadaver obedience".

Reason vs cadaver obedience. One of the two leads to scientific advance, a greater understanding of the world and the universe, and probably a few other things I can't remember right now. The other leads to wars, persecution, genocide and such, as history repeatedly tought us.

I guess reality makes the point better than I ever could.

[Deva]

 

 

Only if I were on the precipice of hell and God was getting ready to shove me in.Then it would be forced, wouldn't it?

 

Otherwise, some form of brain damage.

 

Anyway, I follow the Dharma. 

Where is dharma leading you?

 

Why does anything have to 'lead' anywhere?

 

 

Indeed, bdp.  I was actually thinking about asking that.  In most Christian's minds, there has to be some kind of ultimate plan - something that leads somewhere -or they can't wrap their minds around it.

[raoul]

Heh

 

I'd like to claim this was genuinely my idea, alas, someone of the oldtimers of this site did similar things years ago. Every now and then I just copy the feat

 

Hey - doesn't matter where it came from - it's yours now, you own it. LOL Besides, I do the same stuff myself after telling someone I gonna steal their idea. Everyone of them has graciously allowed me to do so and even thanked me for doing it! But that's our side - we're always doing things to help each other. After all, doesn't the bible teach us to do this? LOL