Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

When atheists go too far

1…1819212324…28

Comments

  • #1002
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    philologos wrote: »
    No, I think a lot of atheists are opposed to this as a result of the conscience that they were given by God. I believe atheists can live a mostly ethical existence but we've still violated God's standards.
    You keep mentioning god's standards, yet what you are talking about are basic standards needed for the proper functioning of our social species, just because someone gathered these basic rules together and said a certain deity forbids them doesn't make them his rules.


  • #1003
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    dvpower wrote: »
    Certainly we should show respect for people even if they have ridiculous views, but why would we show respect for people who hold depraved views, like the view that it is just that people who don't believe in God should suffer eternal pain and suffering?
    Because it's a personal opinion he holds and he's not forcing it on anyone.

    From what I can see Philologos has not attacked anyone here on a personal level, you may disagree with his opinions so attack his arguments; not his person.


  • #1004
    Scanlas The 2nd
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,144 ✭✭✭Scanlas The 2nd


    I think one of the main reasons religion is around is to keep order in society and to ensure a man can have a woman all to himself without her having sex with other men. That's why women are often told to cover up there attractive features in religions and to be ashamed of sex. Why do you a husband could rape his wife all he wanted. The rules were designed to protect the husband from being cheated on. So another man raping her was a big deal. It wasn't a problem at all for a man to rape his wife. It's one big trick by making up false rewards and punishments in some abstract afterlife.


  • #1005
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    philologos, do you feel the that people who follow other religions with different rules will be judged by your god and not theirs?


  • #1006
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    philologos wrote: »
    We've broken God's standard therefore He has the full right to punish us as we live in His creation. Just as much as the judge has the right to sentence you for crime.
    The judge didn't create the circumstances in which you would break the law regardless because of the conditions he set.

    I've also yet to hear one sentence from God, everything in the bibles has been corrupted by man and just doesn't hold any weight with me. It's too clear they where having a guess at how the world came about.


  • #1007
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Because it's a personal opinion he holds and he's not forcing it on anyone.

    From what I can see Philologos has not attacked anyone here on a personal level, you may disagree with his opinions so attack his arguments; not his person.

    If Philologos says that he thinks it is just that my deceased atheist friend will go to hell for an eternity of punishment, then I think its fair to judge Philologos for holding this depraved view. Its fair to say that Philologos himself is depraved.

    If I was to say that I thought, say, that all gays should be murdered, I would expect some personal judgement against me for holding this view even if I don't have the power to murder all gays.


  • #1008
    mackg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,938 ✭✭✭mackg


    This argument will never end, the believers will believe no matter what argument or evidence is presented and the non-believers will not believe without evidence which will never come (religeons glorification of blind faith)


  • #1009
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    You keep mentioning god's standards, yet what you are talking about are basic standards needed for the proper functioning of our social species, just because someone gathered these basic rules together and said a certain deity forbids them doesn't make them his rules.

    Society doesn't function properly as far as I'd see it. A proper functioning society as far as I would see it would be one in which people have healthy relationships with themselves, others and with their Creator. From what I can see this isn't the society that we live in.

    This universe is His, therefore as far as I would see it He knows how best to live in it and He gives us these standards because He loves and cares for us.
    ScumLord wrote: »
    I've also yet to hear one sentence from God, everything in the bibles has been corrupted by man and just doesn't hold any weight with me. It's too clear they where having a guess at how the world came about.

    How about asking Him to speak into your life?
    dvpower wrote: »
    Certainly we should show respect for people even if they have ridiculous views, but why would we show respect for people who hold depraved views, like the view that it is just that people who don't believe in God should suffer eternal pain and suffering?

    If only drkpower (the other d-power) were so gracious?


  • #1010
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    dvpower wrote: »
    If Philologos says that he thinks it is just that my deceased atheist friend will go to hell for an eternity of punishment, then I think its fair to judge Philologos for holding this depraved view. Its fair to say that Philologos himself is depraved.

    If I was to say that I thought, say, that all gays should be murdered, I would expect some personal judgement against me for holding this view even if I don't have the power to murder all gays.

    But Philologos is not saying your friend should go to hell. He doesn't judge your friend because he, as a Christian, believes only God can judge others. He's stating what he believes will happen, he's not passing judgement as far as I can tell.

    I believe more African children will die today, I don't believe they should die today.


  • #1011
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    philologos wrote: »
    Society doesn't function properly as far as I'd see it. A proper functioning society as far as I would see it would be one in which people have healthy relationships with themselves, others and with their Creator.
    There is no proof of any 'creator'.
    philologos wrote: »
    This universe is His, therefore as far as I would see it He knows how best to live in it and He gives us these standards because He loves and cares for us.
    His standards were made up by some crazy guy centuries ago and passed on to people as 'the word of god'. People have become educated since then.
    philologos wrote: »
    How about asking Him to speak into your life?
    Has he every actually spoken to you, or are you so obsessed that you think every little thing is a subliminal message from him?
    Seachmall wrote: »
    I believe more African children will die today, I don't believe they should die today.
    But that's fact, not an opinion. More African children will in fact die today, it's documented and it's what's actually happening.


  • Advertisement
  • #1012
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    But Philologos is not saying your friend should go to hell. He doesn't judge your friend because he, as a Christian, believes only God can judge others. He's stating what he believes will happen, he's not passing judgement as far as I can tell.

    He is. He says he 'stands with God'.

    Not only that, he says that we all are deserving of hell (that is, in his view, actual and eternal punishment), that is you, me, even himself.

    If I was to say that he was deserving of an actual good kicking down a side street for holding the views that he does (of course, he isn't), I would be rightly be banned from this thread. He has said that we all deserve much, much worse.


  • #1013
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    philologos wrote: »
    Society doesn't function properly as far as I'd see it. A proper functioning society as far as I would see it would be one in which people have healthy relationships with themselves, others and with their Creator. From what I can see this isn't the society that we live in.
    Society does work, there's water in my tap, some of my breakfast probably came from over 1000 miles away, people have rights now, women have rights, the sick are healed, the poor get charity.

    Your blinded by the media to the fact the world is a beautiful place and that people in the majority are perfectly good and decent. there's nearly 7 billion people living on planet earth, most of those people regardless of race, religion or financial status probably spend most of their day laughing with their friends.

    It's not unusual people fight, just look at the rest of the animal kingdom or gods kingdom lets call it. It's survival of the fittest, it's cruel and uncaring but beautiful as a whole. Violence is par for the course with life, what makes us unusual is that we get along so well for the most part. We're easily the nicest animal earth has ever seen.


    How about asking Him to speak into your life?
    Because that doesn't work. Because your God is a man made construct, you stopped looking for god and just made do with what you where told. I can't speak to your god.


  • #1014
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    steve06 wrote: »
    But that's fact, not an opinion. More African children will in fact die today, it's documented and it's what's actually happening.
    And Philologos believes it's a fact that non-believers and sinners will go to hell if they don't ask for forgiveness. He's not sending them to hell it's just what he believes will happen.
    dvpower wrote:
    He is. He says he 'stands with God'.
    I could stand with a judges decision but I wouldn't assume myself to be capable of passing judgement.
    Not only that, he says that we all are deserving of hell (that is, in his view, actual and eternal punishment), that is you, me, even himself.
    If we don't repent. He's not saying we will go to hell because of who we are but we will go to hell because of what we do or fail to do. That's the difference between imprisoning someone because of their race or imprisoning someone because they're a rapist.


  • #1015
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    philologos wrote: »
    Society doesn't function properly as far as I'd see it. A proper functioning society as far as I would see it would be one in which people have healthy relationships with themselves, others and with their Creator. From what I can see this isn't the society that we live in.
    The fact that people break rules says nothing about where these rules come from.
    You believe our conscience comes from god, yet it can be shown how altruism is an evolved trait (Dawkins's The Selfish Gene goes into this in great detail) that is needed for a social species to survive. There is no need to invoke a deity to understand us having a conscience.


  • #1016
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    dvpower wrote: »
    Certainly we should show respect for people even if they have ridiculous views, but why would we show respect for people who hold depraved views, like the view that it is just that people who don't believe in God should suffer eternal pain and suffering?

    I respect them just for different reasons to the ones you adumbrate. I respect them enough as fellow man to wish to assist in divesting them of the more dangerous and erroneous ideas.

    But I also respect the rest of my fellow man, and it is important for their sake also to confront bad and dangerous ideas when and where we can.


  • #1017
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    And Philologos believes it's a fact that non-believers and sinners will go to hell if they don't ask for forgiveness. He's not sending them to hell it's just what he believes will happen.
    Of course he isn't sending people to hell - I don't even think there is a hell.

    He agrees that it is just that my dead atheist friend should go to hell. He isn't just reporting the news. He agrees it should happen.
    His view that it is just that my deceased friend should suffer eternal torment, is depraved. The fact that it is nonsence and my friend isn't going to hell at all takes nothing from the misallignment of his own moral compass. That is entirely his own view and he personally should be held to account for his own views.
    Seachmall wrote: »
    If we don't repent.
    No. My dead atheist friend has no opportunity to repent.


  • #1018
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    dvpower wrote: »
    His view that it is just that my deceased friend should suffer eternal torment, is depraved. The fact that it is nonsence and my friend isn't going to hell at all takes nothing from the misallignment of his own moral compass.
    He believes God will send your friend to hell. He believes God is all good. He believes God's ultimate decisions are moral. He is not judging your friend.

    The crux of it is that it's a personal opinion he holds, he does not force it on anyone. He has not attacked you personally for rejecting God (which is the ultimate sin, and thus immoral in Christian belief). He has addressed your arguments respectfully. It's common decency to return the favour.
    No. My dead atheist friend has no opportunity to repent.
    But he did have that opportunity.


  • #1019
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    The fact that people break rules says nothing about where these rules come from.
    You believe our conscience comes from god, yet it can be shown how altruism is an evolved trait (Dawkins's The Selfish Gene goes into this in great detail) that is needed for a social species to survive. There is no need to invoke a deity to understand us having a conscience.

    I don't believe ethical behaviour and altruism are the same thing. Altruism is "I'll scratch my back if you scratch mine" behaviour. Ethical behaviour is genuinely caring for your fellow man in and of itself even if it is of detriment to you. The latter is the example that Christians have in Christ. It's something I'm striving for but admittedly it is difficult.


  • #1020
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    Seachmall wrote: »
    He believes God will send your friend to hell. He believes God is all good. He believes God's ultimate decisions are moral. He is not judging your friend.

    A comment regarding dv's argument.

    Lets put this into a human crime & punishment context, say the stoning of adulterous women in certain countries.
    Now I could say, I think that law is just, I don't want to see anyone stoned and women have the opportunity not to be stoned by not committing the crime but if they do, then they receive the punishment. Me not wanting to see someone stoned doesn't take away from the fact I agree with a barbaric punishment.
    I wonder how someone would be received with that attitude?


  • Advertisement
  • #1021
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    philologos wrote: »
    I don't believe ethical behaviour and altruism are the same thing. Altruism is "I'll scratch my back if you scratch mine" behaviour. Ethical behaviour is genuinely caring for your fellow man in and of itself even if it is of detriment to you. The latter is the example that Christians have in Christ. It's something I'm striving for but admittedly it is difficult.
    The genuine feeling of caring is the vehicle by which altruism is transmitted.
    It's not some abstract feeling but an evolved physiological necessity for altruistic behaviour.


  • #1022
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    He believes God will send your friend to hell. He believes God is all good. He believes God's ultimate decisions are moral.
    Yes. I understand all that - he thinks it is just that my friend be punished for eternity in hell.
    Seachmall wrote: »
    He is not judging your friend.
    As I've said he is just judging the depraved punishment that God hands down - and he supports it.
    Seachmall wrote: »
    The crux of it is that it's a personal opinion he holds, he does not force it on anyone. He has not attacked you personally for rejecting God (which is the ultimate sin, and thus immoral in Christian belief).
    The personal opinion that he holds is that I am a sinner and unless I change my ways should be subjected to eternal punishment.
    The personal opinion that I hold is that he is depraved and, until he changes his views, should be subjected to no more than moral condemnation.
    Seachmall wrote: »
    He has addressed your arguments respectfully. It's common decency to return the favour.
    If I can figure out how to do it, I will try to keep my comdemnation of him respectful:confused:


  • #1023
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    philologos wrote: »
    I don't believe ethical behaviour and altruism are the same thing. Altruism is "I'll scratch my back if you scratch mine" behaviour. Ethical behaviour is genuinely caring for your fellow man in and of itself even if it is of detriment to you. The latter is the example that Christians have in Christ. It's something I'm striving for but admittedly it is difficult.

    But it's never to you're detriment, it's like putting money in the next world bank!


  • #1024
    dpe
    Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭dpe


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Because it's a personal opinion he holds and he's not forcing it on anyone.

    From what I can see Philologos has not attacked anyone here on a personal level, you may disagree with his opinions so attack his arguments; not his person.

    I'd take issue with that. he called me a liar.


  • #1025
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    Ethical behaviour is genuinely caring for your fellow man in and of itself even if it is of detriment to you.

    This also falls under [Evolutionary] Altruism. We evolved as communal animals, we do self-sacrifice for "the greater good".

    If an ape is being attacked by two lions another ape from the same pack will risk his life to save the first ape.

    It comes down to each individual being more likely to pass on their genes if the pack is strong and healthy. It might at first seem counter-intuitive but it's how we evolved and it works.
    dvpower wrote:
    As I've said he is just judging the depraved punishment that God hands down - and he supports it.
    Maybe it's not depraved in his opinion. Morals are subjective hence why we should attack the arguments and reasoning that support those morals and not the holder of the morals (as it'll achieve nothing except a ban).


  • #1026
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    A comment regarding dv's argument.

    Lets put this into a human crime & punishment context, say the stoning of adulterous women in certain countries.
    Now I could say, I think that law is just, I don't want to see anyone stoned and women have the opportunity not to be stoned by not committing the crime but if they do, then they receive the punishment. Me not wanting to see someone stoned doesn't take away from the fact I agree with a barbaric punishment.
    I wonder how someone would be received with that attitude?
    Indeed if someone was to post on these boards calling for us to stone adulterous women, there would be no call for us to respect them or their views.


  • Advertisement
  • #1027
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    dvpower wrote: »
    Indeed if someone was to post on these boards calling for us to stone adulterous women, there would be no call for us to respect them or their views.

    I'm not saying respect his views, I'm saying respect him as a person. He hasn't done anything wrong even if you disagree with him.

    Don't make the argument personal, keep it objective and directed at his reasoning.

    Also he's not calling for anyone to be hurt and injured, he's not praying you go to Hell, he's just suggesting you probably will if you don't repent. As far as he sees it you've been given an option to save yourself, if you refuse that option then you're pretty much volunteering for hell.

    I could easily be misrepresenting Philologos' views, sorry if I am,


  • #1028
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Maybe it's not depraved in his opinion. Morals are subjective hence why we should attack the arguments and reasoning that support those morals and not the holder of the morals (as it'll achieve nothing except a ban).

    Just because morals are subjective doesn't mean that all moral stances are equal. We wouldn't apply the same kind of reasoning to other morally corrupt people like those who agree with stoning adulterers etc...


  • #1029
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Also he's not calling for anyone to be hurt and injured, he's not praying you go to Hell, he's just suggesting you probably will if you don't repent. As far as he sees it you've been given an option to save yourself, if you refuse that option then you're pretty much volunteering for hell.

    But he's also saying that if you dismiss his god, then you deserve it.

    Does he believe those who flew into the twin towers are in hell? Or that they did right by their own god and are now living the life of luxury in their heaven with all those virgins that their god promised them?


  • #1030
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    dvpower wrote: »
    Just because morals are subjective doesn't mean that all moral stances are equal.
    That too is subjective :pac:
    steve06 wrote:
    But he's also saying that if you dismiss his god, then you deserve it.
    If you're given an option to get your head kicked in or not get your head kicked in and you choose the former you deserve to get your head kicked in. It's a choice you made.

    Of course the guy who forced that choice on you is a bit of a dick.


  • #1031
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Also he's not calling for anyone to be hurt and injured, he's not praying you go to Hell, he's just suggesting you probably will if you don't repent. As far as he sees it you've been given an option to save yourself, if you refuse that option then you're pretty much volunteering for hell.

    My deceased atheist friend, according to Philologos' beliefs is destined for hell and there is no way he can escape it. He will be punished for eternity. Philologos agrees that this punisment is just and supports the God dealing out the punishment in his judgement.

    I can't see how this substancially differs from calling on my friend to be hurt or injured. He is certainly not neutral and he is certainly not calling for my friend to be spared.


  • Advertisement
  • #1032
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Seachmall wrote: »
    I'm not saying respect his views, I'm saying respect him as a person. He hasn't done anything wrong even if you disagree with him.

    Don't make the argument personal, keep it objective and directed at his reasoning.
    But it is personal, I don't believe in his god so he thinks I deserve to burn in fire for all eternity. He supports a god that deems eternal never ending torture a fitting punishment for simply not believing in him. Not for wrong doing but for not bowing at his feet like peasants would bow at the feet of their king. Why isn't god any more advanced than a spiteful king?

    He's complacency in torture is apprehensible as far as I'm concerned. It's not even in the same league as the Germans that where complacent in the eradication of the Jews, as those Germans had the threat of death should they speak out. Christians think their god is right to torture because of he's selfish need to be feared and worshipped. It's only one short step to thinking if it's good enough for god to hate these people then it's good enough for me.

    I really don't see how these kind of things can be ignored just because Christians say a prayer or two.


  • #1033
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Seachmall wrote: »
    If you're given an option to get your head kicked in or not get your head kicked in and you choose the former you deserve to get your head kicked in. It's a choice you made.

    But there's actually nothing to say you're going to get your head kicked in other than rumours written by drunks centuries ago. So being a rational person, should you accept it or live in fear?


  • #1034
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    dvpower wrote: »
    My deceased atheist friend, according to Philologos' beliefs is destined for hell and there is no way he can escape it. He will be punished for eternity. Philologos agrees that this punisment is just and supports the God dealing out the punishment in his judgement.

    I can't see how this substancially differs from calling on my friend to be hurt or injured. He is certainly not neutral and he is certainly not calling for my friend to be spared.

    Because he believes God's decisions are moral. And because he believes your friend had a choice.

    I don't share his beliefs and I'm not going keep arguing them. My only point was do not make it personal. Do not attack him. He holds a belief regarding your friend. He did not force those beliefs on your friend. He is simply sharing his beliefs on a public forum. If you don't want to hear those beliefs there is no need to click into the topic.


  • #1035
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    dvpower wrote: »
    Certainly we should show respect for people even if they have ridiculous views, but why would we show respect for people who hold depraved views, like the view that it is just that people who don't believe in God should suffer eternal pain and suffering?

    I couldn't respect people like that. Don't care about respecting their belief systems; they are beneath contempt, in my "book".


  • #1036
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    ScumLord wrote: »
    But it is personal, I don't believe in his god so he thinks I deserve to burn in fire for all eternity. He supports a god that deems eternal never ending torture a fitting punishment for simply not believing in him. Not for wrong doing but for not bowing at his feet like peasants would bow at the feet of their king. Why isn't god any more advanced than a spiteful king?
    Nice one. :)
    This it what you get when you follow a belief system with its roots in a time when such bowing and scraping was the norm, and expected.


  • #1037
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    That too is subjective :pac:
    It is. But we don't have to go too far down the morals are subjective road before we need to abolish all of our systems of justice.

    Put it this way - we certainly wouldn't pass a law to torture non believers here (or at least we would think it reprehensible), why would it be acceptable in the afterlife.


  • #1038
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    ScumLord wrote: »
    He supports a god that deems eternal never ending torture a fitting punishment for simply not believing in him. Not for wrong doing but for not bowing at his feet like peasants would bow at the feet of their king. Why isn't god any more advanced than a spiteful king?

    It isn't for not believing in Him. It's for how we've disobeyed His standards throughout our lives. The penalty isn't because of not believing in Him, it's because of what we have done wrong. God has given us a second chance by taking away that penalty so that we can come to know Him more. It is up to you if you want to accept this.

    It's for precisely for wrongdoing.
    ScumLord wrote: »
    Christians think their god is right to torture because of he's selfish need to be feared and worshipped. It's only one short step to thinking if it's good enough for god to hate these people then it's good enough for me.

    This hasn't been given as a reason by anyone. I don't believe God needs to be worshipped actually. Even if nobody gave a fiddles about Him He would still be God.

    I believe simply put that God has the right to judge accordingly for our wrongdoing. He has offered us a chance to start again, but it is up to us to take it.

    I don't understand the "hate" argument you've presented either.


  • #1039
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    philologos wrote: »
    It isn't for not believing in Him. It's for how we've disobeyed His standards throughout our lives.

    It is for not believing in him. Because if you don't believe in him, then why follow his make believe rules for sinning?

    You also believe we're born with sin, yet we've done nothing? Therefore your god has sentenced you to hell before you even breath or think!


  • #1040
    brosy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 65 ✭✭brosy


    Asry wrote: »

    But the stuff I believe in include ... Intelligent Design

    It is pretty handy when you get told up front how to never take somebody seriously ever again.


  • #1041
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Because he believes God's decisions are moral. And because he believes your friend had a choice.
    It's not a choice. It's believe me or suffer. It's like blaming the victim of a rape for not choosing to have sex with her attacker, The attacker could say well I gave you the choice of consensual sex or rape and you chose rape.

    If I give someone a choice I won't threaten them to make the choice I want and I won't bully them for choosing another option that I don't like.


  • Advertisement
  • #1042
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Because he believes God's decisions are moral. And because he believes your friend had a choice.

    I don't share his beliefs and I'm not going keep arguing them. My only point was do not make it personal. Do not attack him. He holds a belief regarding your friend. He did not force those beliefs on your friend. He is simply sharing his beliefs on a public forum. If you don't want to hear those beliefs there is no need to click into the topic.

    It is my belief that he personally ought to be held to account for his position. I wouldn't want to force this belief on you - you should carry on not attacking him.
    I'm simply sharing my beliefs on a public forum. Of course if you don't want to hear my beliefs...


  • #1043
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    philologos wrote: »
    It isn't for not believing in Him. It's for how we've disobeyed His standards throughout our lives.
    So what's the very first commandment about? Seems like he's first and foremost wish is that everyone believe in him.
    The penalty isn't because of not believing in Him, it's because of what we have done wrong.
    How can his creation, created by him go wrong?

    This hasn't been given as a reason by anyone. I don't believe God needs to be worshipped actually. Even if nobody gave a fiddles about Him He would still be God.
    funny the bible goes on about his believers getting into heaven.

    I believe simply put that God has the right to judge accordingly for our wrongdoing. He has offered us a chance to start again, but it is up to us to take it.
    That's not a choice it's a threat.


  • #1044
    Mark200
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭Mark200


    philologos wrote: »
    It isn't for not believing in Him. It's for how we've disobeyed His standards throughout our lives. The penalty isn't because of not believing in Him, it's because of what we have done wrong. God has given us a second chance by taking away that penalty so that we can come to know Him more. It is up to you if you want to accept this.

    It's for precisely for wrongdoing.

    You can spin it all you want, but not being a believer is considered 'wrongdoing' and so what scumlord said is right.

    As I said before: Your belief is that your god has created us sick and commanded us to be better. How ridiculous is that? I'm quite glad that such a thing is not true. If your god cared so much about these things then maybe he wouldn't have created us with the instincts to, for example, lust after others.

    I think it's a disgrace to human intelligence that you unashamedly believe these things.

    But what's worse than that is that, not only do you believe them to be true, but that you feel that this being is good, worthy of respect or worship, and someone that should be obeyed.

    You'd make a good slave. I think you'd like North Korea.


  • #1045
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Seachmall wrote: »

    Don't make the argument personal, keep it objective and directed at his reasoning.

    Ideally that's brilliant. Practically it's not. No matter how hard you try you are never going to make this argument in any way more objective. Philogos believes in God, He's a real entity who had a real impact in Philogos's life. Every argument he makes is in light of the fact that God impacted in his life and is merely thus a self rationalisation of his beliefs. That may seem harsh but the proof is in the posting, push him on any issue from abortion to death and he'll usually just end up with 'I believe' regardless of how flawed his argument turns out to be.

    For some people, they could not personally fathom the idea of saying "**** off you assehole" to their God. If they cannot do that then no amount of logic, objective reasoning is going to make them doubt their position on one various aspect or another. It just leads to time wasted. If you want to have a dialectic with them you're gonna first have to dabble in the emotional side of things. Sure that may seem unconventional and defy common sense, but it's what works. Take anybody out of their comfort zone and their rational minds suddenly starts to kick in. This applies to all of us and anyone who thinks it is logic that persuades a crowd really needs to luck at democracy in action with a microscope. As long as a world without God appears bleak to philogos, or conversely the world with God appears terrible to the non believer you guys are just going to keep going in circles ad infinitum.


  • #1046
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    ScumLord wrote: »
    So what's the very first commandment about? Seems like he's first and foremost wish is that everyone believe in him.

    The penalty is for every wrongdoing (wrong in a Christian sense is what is against God's standards).
    ScumLord wrote: »
    How can his creation, created by him go wrong?

    We chose to do what was wrong according to our free will.
    ScumLord wrote: »
    funny the bible goes on about his believers getting into heaven.

    Precisely because they have accepted Him and His offer of forgiveness along the lines of the Parable of the Prodigal Son. If we are too stubborn to do this then we determine our own fate. As far as I'm concerned this is great news and I thank Him daily for allowing me to start again and for being a part of my life.
    ScumLord wrote: »
    That's not a choice it's a threat.

    It's a choice. It's down to you.


  • #1047
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    philologos wrote: »
    The penalty is for every wrongdoing (wrong in a Christian sense is what is against God's standards).
    'God's' standards were written by man.
    philologos wrote: »
    We chose to do what was wrong according to our free will.
    Wrong according to a book, not even written by the man who made the rules?
    philologos wrote: »
    If we are too stubborn to do this then we determine our own fate.
    Maybe if he proved himself to be an actual entity, then people would believe.


  • #1048
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    dvpower wrote: »
    It is my belief that he personally ought to be held to account for his position. I wouldn't want to force this belief on you - you should carry on not attacking him.
    I'm simply sharing my beliefs on a public forum. Of course if you don't want to hear my beliefs...

    Listen, if you can't understand his position you're not going to be able to argue it. No need to get sarcastic about it. No one said he shouldn't be held accountable for his position, I was merelysuggesting you keep the discussion focused on the arguments and don't sink to insults.


  • #1049
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    This god non-entity can't prove it exists because it's not there in the first place. That's the get out of jail card the faithers use; you can't test god. You must show your unswerving support by not testing him.

    Your gods are cruel, vain and preening - because we created them in man's image; not the other way round.


  • #1050
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Asry wrote: »
    Maybe I used the wrong term? :s Maybe I mean the Watchmaker Theory one. I'm just reading about that on wikipedia now. I just mean the idea that for everything to be so complex and perfect and in such delicate symbiosis...surely someone must have made it that way? The designer for the design?

    You do realise that evolution explains perfectly the complexities of all life?


  • Advertisement
  • #1051
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Listen, if you can't understand his position you're not going to be able to argue it. No need to get sarcastic about it.

    I understand his position only too well - he never tires of annunciating it. It is utterly pointless trying to argue against God, because God is a figment of his own imagination.

    I wasn't attempting to be sarcastic. I was attempting, perhaps badly, to say that we two have conflicting beliefs. Mine that he should be personally held to account, your's that we should try and seperate the post from the poster. Naturally, you'll want to respect my right to my view.


Advertisement