Great Christian Fallacies.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-05-2013, 08:33 PM
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
(14-05-2013 08:05 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Thank you, I will elaborate on the points you have chosen to address.

Thank you, Mr. Woof, for your courteous and thoughtful replies. I'd like to address some of your points.

Quote:(1)"Merely means without wrong doing sin". In placing human beings in an ultra short test of sorts, with no justification as to His essential purpose, outcome, rationale, authority and at the expense of horrendous suffering (natural and instigated) does not IMO, on the face of things make for a loving/capable God.
I do not see God's attitude towards beasts of burden, the lame, the psychotic, depressed, blind, disfigured, starving etc as a sane precursor to events postulated.
Withoutsome suffering the creative action to alleviate it would not be necessary; the suffering the Judaeo/ Christian God allows/ creates seems grossly excessive relative to any kindly plan for humanity.

There are dozens of justifications offered in the scriptures. I come to the table with the same objections and questions as you. I look to philosophy, logic and other's opinions, but the scriptures speak on the testing of man. The whole book of Job (I would argue) is written for two reasons: 1. Prophecies of the coming Messiah, Jesus 2. Explanations and reasons for this present world and the testing of people

Quote:(2) Just as well for the test pilots......perhaps God should have given us an opt out clause? Why was the plane abused?

Sorry that my analogy was a poor choice and unclear. God gives us very, very good, not perfect bodies. God gives us very good souls. We abuse them or not. We choose to follow God or not. We pray to Jesus or not. We write poems, make love, make children and build great works. We kill, steal and lust, too. Test pilots who want to "push the limits" of their bodies and souls can survive or sometimes crash and burn. I never blame the plane manufacturer if the plane can be demonstrated to have been of good manufacture.

Quote:(3) The fact that the Universe sort of plods along is not illustrative of the Christian god's claim of many wonderful palaces within his father's mansion, streets paved in gold (Revelations) in Heaven.....rather upper class, all of which seems to depict an eternal life sadly polluted by the reality we perceive about us and no reasonable considerations relevant to a better and saner after life.

I prefer the translation "many rooms" not "many mansions". Eternal life for believer and infidel alike is an everlasting body that experiences pain and hunger and etc. differently. It's a choice. Every one of the poorest, most deprived persons can go to Heaven. It's actually vice versa from what you wrote--which I can see is heartfelt, really I can--many of the richest on Earth want nothing of afterlife rewards and many of the most deprived are godly people who await some good things. Remember, there are blessings on Earth too for Christians! I feel like non-Christians make Christianity about the afterlife when God and people are way too practical to be constantly focused on the great beyond.

Quote:(4) Why should I repent for something my alleged spiritual forbears did by allegedly creating permanent and indelible sin. I don't want Jimmy Bakker, Jimmy Swaggert, or even Jim Jones appealing on my behalf for entry into some weird cosmic club.
Christians really need to look at the 'original sin' notion along with God's grandiose state which defies logic.

You have not elaborated on my straw man fallacies, so I am not sure as to what you are referring?Ad fidem arguments, premised thus, really need a lot of working on IMHO.

I've never done that. I've never prayed in over 20 years for anything my antecedents did. I'm tempted to sin, sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. You too?

When I say straw man, I did not mean it as some kind of ad hom accusation. I'm merely asking you to review your syllogisms with care. YOU ARE RIGHT in much of your post if things are as you say. But, for example, the creation was made good and not perfect, which is different. If it was made perfect, you would be 100% right. An (unwitting) straw man argument was composed.

Thanks.
My contention is that any higher spiritual forces, perhaps applicable to our ongoing welfare and benefits, are biblically expressed in the main, misleadingly, erroneously, egotistically, and expressing the views of mankind.

The testing of human kind I refer to does not relate to poor versus rich; rather my point is that the varying durations of life, in terms of years, conditions, awareness, personality types etc do not make for a reasonable assessment of humankind's efforts to reach some unspecified higher state of being. Job could contemplate his boils, bad luck and misery while a child, perhaps born with spina bifida or perhaps no brain at all, could make no such contemplations.

AS for creation (earth) not being "perfect" but a testing ground, I have already contended that the gross suffering inherent within existence (animals included) do not make for a fai or decent testing God. Until round 500 C.E. Christians believed in reincarnation, a theory I also hold to present many difficulties, but one which at least suggest that the soul or monad engages a multitude of learning experiences.
While I am not pushing this metaphysical theory (the ultimate point of it all still remains a massive conundrum) and perhaps a theory the Christians should have retained.

Sticks and stones may break my bones
but names will never hurt me~~~~~
Cooyon WillieLaughat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2013, 09:31 AM
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
Quote:God is evil by creating hell, satan, humans, suffering, etc. He is also a hypocrite by giving humans commandments he does not himself follow.

What is the absolute moral standard(s) you apply to say what is evil and what is good? Suffering is a part of the evolved world around us. Zebras suffer when lions eat them. Do you protest the dietary habits of lions in the streets of Washington?

The word "hypocrite" was actually coined as spoken by Jesus in the New Testament and means "actor". It was used against the elite who told others what was true in a religious vein while being lost themselves. How did you derive that God is a hypocrite for using God's own standards in the Bible He wrote?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2013, 09:33 AM
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
Quote:My contention is that any higher spiritual forces, perhaps applicable to our ongoing welfare and benefits, are biblically expressed in the main, misleadingly, erroneously, egotistically, and expressing the views of mankind.

The testing of human kind I refer to does not relate to poor versus rich; rather my point is that the varying durations of life, in terms of years, conditions, awareness, personality types etc do not make for a reasonable assessment of humankind's efforts to reach some unspecified higher state of being. Job could contemplate his boils, bad luck and misery while a child, perhaps born with spina bifida or perhaps no brain at all, could make no such contemplations.

AS for creation (earth) not being "perfect" but a testing ground, I have already contended that the gross suffering inherent within existence (animals included) do not make for a fai or decent testing God. Until round 500 C.E. Christians believed in reincarnation, a theory I also hold to present many difficulties, but one which at least suggest that the soul or monad engages a multitude of learning experiences.
While I am not pushing this metaphysical theory (the ultimate point of it all still remains a massive conundrum) and perhaps a theory the Christians should have retained.

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. You have studied suffering very carefully, but I find it a part of nature as I posted above. Suffering has meaning and so does testing. Both suffering and testing are a necessity in any kind of higher learning, be it body improvement and athletic endeavor or the drive to graduate with honors from a top university.

Man suffers and tests and finds meaning. You may want to read the book of Ecclesiastes next; it speaks powerfully and with an authentic voice on this very issue--I think in a more direct way than the book of Job, even.

Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2013, 11:16 AM
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
(15-05-2013 09:31 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:God is evil by creating hell, satan, humans, suffering, etc. He is also a hypocrite by giving humans commandments he does not himself follow.

What is the absolute moral standard(s) you apply to say what is evil and what is good? Suffering is a part of the evolved world around us. Zebras suffer when lions eat them. Do you protest the dietary habits of lions in the streets of Washington?

The word "hypocrite" was actually coined as spoken by Jesus in the New Testament and means "actor". It was used against the elite who told others what was true in a religious vein while being lost themselves. How did you derive that God is a hypocrite for using God's own standards in the Bible He wrote?

It's a Greek word. What evidence do you have that Jesus spoke Greek?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
15-05-2013, 11:22 AM
Re: Great Christian Fallacies.
The Biblical God is easily either evil, a hypocrite... And/Or the idea that people seem to have made up later (absolute moral rules) is bullshit.

God gives moral laws man now say are absolute... God doesn't follow those rules.(God is evil or the rule isn't absolute)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2013, 12:53 PM (This post was last modified: 15-05-2013 01:38 PM by childeye.)
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
(12-05-2013 06:15 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
Quote:God's Perfect Goodness WE must ask if it is reasonable to believe that any potential cosmic state entails perfection. Perfect, in relationship to what universal unchanging absolute? Also, if such state, or state approaching such existed are we, or some of us party to it? A "perfect state of being would negate any change, creativity, action, challenge or betterment.........after all how do we improve on such? The whole concept sounds like stagnation, or the playing of endless cosmic computer games for some dubious final answer......

As "a matter of conscience", such a perfection would be called peace and contentment rather than stagnation.

[quote]The Free Will Fallacy. A God who created all of the aspects of our existence could only give us freedom within a predetermined state of being. As this state of being can be utilized to cause misery to man and beast in the extreme, it follows that the orchestrator of such(God) must be held to account and not his creations for testing the waters. If a brilliant designer designs a less than brilliant aeroplane with a built in fault to test the efficiency of his crew and the plane crashes, surely the designer is primarily at fault.In never challenging God the believer happily fobs off the bona fides of his nature.
As a "matter of faith", all one has to do is doubt the integrity of the Maker to second guess one's own self. This is typical in Father Son relationships.

Quote:The Great Fall Fallacy How is the nature of the perfection from which a fall occurred assessed.This really comes across as an oxymoron! Perfection, as defined, is the ultimate, something to be clinged to, rather than escape from.It is argued that the escapees were evil and ungrateful, not appreciating their lot so absconded from an ideal state.Quite simply the ideal state is designed to give fatuous reasoning as to mankind's predicament and his means of getting back on track.
As a "matter of vanity", It is well known that everyone takes for granted those things that are good. They are only missed when they are not there any longer.

Quote:The Omniscience Fallacy. An eternal all knowing God is posited as knowing ALL, past, future, and present. This is seen as a prerequisite for that position, any less creating uncertainty and placing us all on shaky grounds. Unfortunately. by being all knowing God is locked in to his ordained past/present/future system so cannot, within this definition, alter his past perfect considerations. This of course also flies in the face of his omnipotence (total power) which seems to contradict the substance of his total/absolute planning. Clearly the words being used do not make sense, at least at the secular level.
Secular reasoning indeed would struggle to comprehend all knowing and all powerful. But of course all powerful and all knowing could only fulfill the other.
Quote:The Great Test Fallacy. If we ignore the pre destination fallacy of Calvin( it all happened in Heaven and God is playing silly games) then we are left with a fair test of human beings existing (arguably) foetus to senility, some nine or ten decades at the maximum, all to be fairly tested for squillions of years of afterlife and all that this scenario magically entails. Clearly the qualifying period is way out of synch with the envisaged future. Even if ongoing tests were part of the plan any ultimate purpose along with the serious[/font] trapping along the way are not considered
An impressive line of reasoning. Hence it could not be that men are being tested but rather something is being experienced and proven in the face of doubt.
Quote:I have indicated but five simple fallacies. Within Judaism and Islam they are also grossly prevelant and rest on the initial premise that a stupendous super perfect God exists Universally, yet gives no sound evidence for this, or even mild suggestion, given life as history has presented itself to us. These religions are bizarre, irrational, disturbing, degrading to our intellect, irresponsible,monetarily grasping,simplistic, and potentially very dangerous.
A rather straw man argument focused on religion. Proposing that the earth revolved around the sun was once considered degrading to the intellect by the religious. Hypocrisy should be avoided. Perhaps we should consider that believing in God is more about an inward reflection.

Quote:Any potentially higher cosmic concepts are not served well by such buffoonery
True. Nothing is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2013, 01:01 PM
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
double post
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2013, 01:13 PM
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
(15-05-2013 09:31 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Suffering is a part of the evolved world around us. Zebras suffer when lions eat them. Do you protest the dietary habits of lions in the streets of Washington?

The word "hypocrite" was actually coined as spoken by Jesus in the New Testament and means "actor". It was used against the elite who told others what was true in a religious vein while being lost themselves. How did you derive that God is a hypocrite for using God's own standards in the Bible He wrote?

Interesting. So now he says suffering is part of the "evolved world", (even while denying Evolution in the other thread), trying to deflect the blame from his god(s). I thought fundies thought it came into history as a direct result of the "fall" from grace. What happened to "preternatural perfection". Boy these peeps are inconsistent.
Anyone have a scorecard ?
Jebus only said a few of the things he is said to have said. You were not there. You really have no clue what he said. The Jesus Seminar agrees on nothing, unanimously, in terms of his actual quotes. As usual, "fundie knows best".

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating Yogi, CAAT-LY.
Assistant Manager, Vice Detection, Whoville : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2013, 04:50 PM
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
(15-05-2013 09:33 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:My contention is that any higher spiritual forces, perhaps applicable to our ongoing welfare and benefits, are biblically expressed in the main, misleadingly, erroneously, egotistically, and expressing the views of mankind.

The testing of human kind I refer to does not relate to poor versus rich; rather my point is that the varying durations of life, in terms of years, conditions, awareness, personality types etc do not make for a reasonable assessment of humankind's efforts to reach some unspecified higher state of being. Job could contemplate his boils, bad luck and misery while a child, perhaps born with spina bifida or perhaps no brain at all, could make no such contemplations.

AS for creation (earth) not being "perfect" but a testing ground, I have already contended that the gross suffering inherent within existence (animals included) do not make for a fai or decent testing God. Until round 500 C.E. Christians believed in reincarnation, a theory I also hold to present many difficulties, but one which at least suggest that the soul or monad engages a multitude of learning experiences.
While I am not pushing this metaphysical theory (the ultimate point of it all still remains a massive conundrum) and perhaps a theory the Christians should have retained.

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. You have studied suffering very carefully, but I find it a part of nature as I posted above. Suffering has meaning and so does testing. Both suffering and testing are a necessity in any kind of higher learning, be it body improvement and athletic endeavor or the drive to graduate with honors from a top university.

Man suffers and tests and finds meaning. You may want to read the book of Ecclesiastes next; it speaks powerfully and with an authentic voice on this very issue--I think in a more direct way than the book of Job, even.

Thank you.
What is more relevant is the degree of suffering to humans which far outweighs any mysterious rewards to engage in some nebulous 'afterworld'.
Consider the holocaust, those women locked up for ten years and tortured by a lunatic in the U.S, The Inquisition, prolonged torture in prison camps.
This seems a very strange and unreasonable asssement to the utilized by a perfect and loving god.................

Sticks and stones may break my bones
but names will never hurt me~~~~~
Cooyon WillieLaughat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-05-2013, 01:34 PM
RE: Great Christian Fallacies.
Quote:What is more relevant is the degree of suffering to humans which far outweighs any mysterious rewards to engage in some nebulous 'afterworld'.
Consider the holocaust, those women locked up for ten years and tortured by a lunatic in the U.S, The Inquisition, prolonged torture in prison camps.
This seems a very strange and unreasonable asssement to the utilized by a perfect and loving god.................

Your glass is quite half-full. It usually is if you're a captivated freethinker.

A cruel God would have a hardier creation. The average stay in Auschwitz was three months before death. Lacking B vitamins and a basic diet, camp prisoners had trouble remembering even the names of lost ones, another mercy.

No, if I was the cruel God you propose, I'd make the bodies/soul cages tougher, so the Nazis could torture people psychically and physically for five-seven years or more instead of three months.

You don't understand because you understand and believe what you want to understand.

You don't understand.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: