Reasons for creation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-11-2011, 08:30 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 08:24 PM)lucradis Wrote:  All I mean is that just because an atheist answers the question it doesn't mean that they didn't take the creation story as fact before doing so. I did. I also meant that philosophy is open ended, it can take all perspectives into account. I don't see how you would actually need to be a believer to view it as one. Unless as I have seen within this thread don't get me wrong, the person answering as an atheist is unwilling to play the hypothetical game.

I also get that a genuine creationist would offer an interesting angle, but I don't think that the angle offered couldn't be gathered from one of us already as a bunch of us have seen that side too.

The question is open ended for the reason alone that not even a creationist could even hope to answer the question. No one could, other than god itself. So it becomes open unless otherwise stated.

I apologize for being a bit over sensitive. Let's all just get along. Maybe snuggle party?

I think a snuggle party is our only option at this point.

I mean, we've pretty much derailed this topic.

*snuggles*

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
28-11-2011, 08:32 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
Alright, break it up. Ease off the Christian. Jeez... atheists. Tongue

A question about creation is theistic. It wasn't a question about self-organization. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2011, 08:32 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 05:02 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 03:56 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 12:12 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  To give the Son a purpose and an inheritance.

Well as the myth goes he failed on both counts.

The son was cruelly tortured to death and all he inherited was largely a depraved lunatic asylum.

/sigh

No offense, but this is part of the reason why Christians get so awry around anti-theists. I get it. I understand what you're saying, but it seems that there is a refusal to understand the opposite end, which isn't fair to a theist.

Yes, the Son inherited a "depraved lunatic asylum"; however, that is wholly necessary to His POINT and His INHERITANCE. God "created" sin. You can't get around that fact - if He's omnipotent, then He had to do this. This means humanity was created to be fallen and depraved. Why? So that the Son would have a purpose - to be sacrificed for the ones that were chosen by God before the foundation of the world.

Please understand my frustration... it's not meant to be preachy or testy, it's just that it seems there is little or no empathy for theist when it comes to an atheist. I know this is a two-way street because you've probably encountered the EXACT same thing from Christians - probably worse.

Sigh indeed! Your "argument" sounds like the story about the man who kept hitting his head with a hammer because it felt so good when he stopped.

What right does your demon/god have to create massive suffering ,spread unequally among man and beast, just so a few of his chosen cronies can enjoy some unknowable phenomenon? Is power synonymous with love and compassion?

The most intense suffering known to mankind is far, far, far, worse than joy from the most exqisite pleasure so this idea of a select few (pre chosen) to gain some weird advantage from the misery of others is quite evil. And what of the suffeing of soulless animals? Your god is an egocentric sadist!

Calvin was one sick puppy!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2011, 08:35 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
Yikes, Woof! He ain't a Calvinist, he's a Baptist. Might as well call Lemaitre a sick puppy for giving us the primeval atom and an indifferent universe. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2011, 08:37 PM (This post was last modified: 28-11-2011 08:38 PM by kingschosen.)
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 08:32 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 05:02 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 03:56 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 12:12 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  To give the Son a purpose and an inheritance.

Well as the myth goes he failed on both counts.

The son was cruelly tortured to death and all he inherited was largely a depraved lunatic asylum.

/sigh

No offense, but this is part of the reason why Christians get so awry around anti-theists. I get it. I understand what you're saying, but it seems that there is a refusal to understand the opposite end, which isn't fair to a theist.

Yes, the Son inherited a "depraved lunatic asylum"; however, that is wholly necessary to His POINT and His INHERITANCE. God "created" sin. You can't get around that fact - if He's omnipotent, then He had to do this. This means humanity was created to be fallen and depraved. Why? So that the Son would have a purpose - to be sacrificed for the ones that were chosen by God before the foundation of the world.

Please understand my frustration... it's not meant to be preachy or testy, it's just that it seems there is little or no empathy for theist when it comes to an atheist. I know this is a two-way street because you've probably encountered the EXACT same thing from Christians - probably worse.

Sigh indeed! Your "argument" sounds like the story about the man who kept hitting his head with a hammer because it felt so good when he stopped.

What right does your demon/god have to create massive suffering ,spread unequally among man and beast, just so a few of his chosen cronies can enjoy some unknowable phenomenon? Is power synonymous with love and compassion?

The most intense suffering known to mankind is far, far, far, worse than joy from the most exqisite pleasure so this idea of a select few (pre chosen) to gain some weird advantage from the misery of others is quite evil. And what of the suffeing of soulless animals? Your god is an egocentric sadist!

Calvin was one sick puppy!

You see it one way. I see it another.
(28-11-2011 08:35 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Yikes, Woof! He ain't a Calvinist, he's a Baptist. Might as well call Lemaitre a sick puppy for giving us the primeval atom and an indifferent universe. Tongue

I'm a Reformed Baptist, as such I believe in the Doctrine of Election. I'm not a Calvinist, but I share many of the same views. Woof was justified in his response. Thank you, though.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
28-11-2011, 08:44 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 08:35 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Yikes, Woof! He ain't a Calvinist, he's a Baptist. Might as well call Lemaitre a sick puppy for giving us the primeval atom and an indifferent universe. Tongue

True HoC but these evolutionary blokes did't resort to bizarre claims about highly improbable and devious experimental systems.Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2011, 09:01 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 08:44 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 08:35 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Yikes, Woof! He ain't a Calvinist, he's a Baptist. Might as well call Lemaitre a sick puppy for giving us the primeval atom and an indifferent universe. Tongue

True HoC but these evolutionary blokes did't resort to bizarre claims about highly improbable and devious experimental systems.Dodgy

What?!?! It was Hoyle the mathematician who turned the primeval atom into BBT with scorn, and whose "devious experimental system" was to manipulate probability to reflect that scorn... and he was a mathematician, one of my peeps. Lunacy knows no philosophical boundary. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2011, 09:06 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 05:54 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 05:45 PM)seljusisk. Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 05:02 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  No offense, but this is part of the reason why Christians get so awry around anti-theists. I get it. I understand what you're saying, but it seems that there is a refusal to understand the opposite end, which isn't fair to a theist.

Yes, the Son inherited a "depraved lunatic asylum"; however, that is wholly necessary to His POINT and His INHERITANCE. God "created" sin. You can't get around that fact - if He's omnipotent, then He had to do this. This means humanity was created to be fallen and depraved. Why? So that the Son would have a purpose - to be sacrificed for the ones that were chosen by God before the foundation of the world.

Please understand my frustration... it's not meant to be preachy or testy, it's just that it seems there is little or no empathy for theist when it comes to an atheist. I know this is a two-way street because you've probably encountered the EXACT same thing from Christians - probably worse.

im not sure what you mean when you say, 'refusal to understand the opposite end ' and then talk about how god created man to fall so that his son would have a purpose. i might of read it wrong... lol

It's a matter of perspective. The product changes when it's viewed from different point of views. I'm just saying that you have to look at what I'm saying from a theistic perspective and not from an atheistic perspective because that's isn't fair. Just like it isn't fair for a Christian to apply Christian perspectives and thoughts to an atheist's life and perspectives.

Hmmmm! I'm not at all sure you are even Christian?
Do you worship on the Saturday Sabbath?
To my knowledge most mainstream Christians
do not follow Calvin'[/size][/i]s view. Perhaps you should change to a 'truer' Christianity.
"Convictions are[i][size=x-small]more dangerous foes of truth than lies" Nietzsche.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2011, 09:12 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 09:06 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 05:54 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 05:45 PM)seljusisk. Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 05:02 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  No offense, but this is part of the reason why Christians get so awry around anti-theists. I get it. I understand what you're saying, but it seems that there is a refusal to understand the opposite end, which isn't fair to a theist.

Yes, the Son inherited a "depraved lunatic asylum"; however, that is wholly necessary to His POINT and His INHERITANCE. God "created" sin. You can't get around that fact - if He's omnipotent, then He had to do this. This means humanity was created to be fallen and depraved. Why? So that the Son would have a purpose - to be sacrificed for the ones that were chosen by God before the foundation of the world.

Please understand my frustration... it's not meant to be preachy or testy, it's just that it seems there is little or no empathy for theist when it comes to an atheist. I know this is a two-way street because you've probably encountered the EXACT same thing from Christians - probably worse.

im not sure what you mean when you say, 'refusal to understand the opposite end ' and then talk about how god created man to fall so that his son would have a purpose. i might of read it wrong... lol

It's a matter of perspective. The product changes when it's viewed from different point of views. I'm just saying that you have to look at what I'm saying from a theistic perspective and not from an atheistic perspective because that's isn't fair. Just like it isn't fair for a Christian to apply Christian perspectives and thoughts to an atheist's life and perspectives.

Hmmmm! I'm not at all sure you are even Christian?
Do you worship on the Saturday Sabbath?
To my knowledge most mainstream Christians
do not follow Calvin'[/size][/i]s view. Perhaps you should change to a 'truer' Christianity.
"Convictions are[i][size=x-small]more dangerous foes of truth than lies" Nietzsche.

No, thanks. I read the Bible. It's filled with the concept of election.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2011, 09:18 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 09:01 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 08:44 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 08:35 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Yikes, Woof! He ain't a Calvinist, he's a Baptist. Might as well call Lemaitre a sick puppy for giving us the primeval atom and an indifferent universe. Tongue

True HoC but these evolutionary blokes did't resort to bizarre claims about highly improbable and devious experimental systems.Dodgy

What?!?! It was Hoyle the mathematician who turned the primeval atom into BBT with scorn, and whose "devious experimental system" was to manipulate probability to reflect that scorn... and he was a mathematician, one of my peeps. Lunacy knows no philosophical boundary. Tongue

Yes but good science does claim to work on probabilities within arbitrary boundaries.

I agree on the boundaries bit relevant to philosophy and see this as creating on going openess incompatible with hard line absolutes.

Was Hoyle a Baptist? .......Confused
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: