Teeter Tottering on believing.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-12-2011, 10:39 AM
Teeter Tottering on believing.
My friend Justice and I always have some seriously deep conversations- the other night, I asked him "Justice, why are you an Atheist? What's your reason for knowing that God doesn't exist?" (Not asking this because I questioned him. I'm an Agnostic Atheist myself) and he began to delve into the concept of how all religions have their God portrayed to be perfect; omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient. And with that, he pointed out the ways in which God is not perfect.

God is supposedly omnipotent, meaning all-powerful and all-doing.
1) there are instances in the bible where God in fact cannot do everything.
2) if you tell an omnipotent being of sorts to destroy itself, it cannot do so, because God is said to be mortal, eternal, and omnipresent.

If He is all powerful, why is He unable to release humanity from the penalty of Original Sin? If you say that He is able to, but that He chooses not to, then how can you claim that He is all-good? Or the most compassionate? If He were all-powerful and all-good, He would have simply erased the Original Sin, and let people be judged on their own actions, not those of someone they never knew. He would have simply eliminated Adam and Eve, and started again (and this time, take the Tree out of the Garden), thus releasing all the other people who would ever live from the sin supposedly committed by the first man and woman.

If God is omniscient, he should NEVER change his mind. Think about that carefully. How could someone who knows the future change his mind? Changing his mind means that he did not know what he was going to do or what was going to happen, and shows his uncertainty. But the bible is full of instances where God changes his mind.
The Bible also expectates of how God repeatedly changes his mind. One may argue that He knew that He would change His mind, and that He knew He would regret these things, but then you have to admit that He did not truly change his mind, and His regret was not real regret-- in other words the bible becomes deceitful and you cannot trust what it says.

Omnibenevolent means that God only does things that are good. Period. Is everything in this world good? He Himself will let you know that He is not omnibenevolent. Isaiah 45:7 "I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these things." Jeremiah 18:11 "Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you." I Kings 22:23 "The Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee." Why would He do these things if He only does that which is good? The bible is filled with examples of god doing evil deeds.

Omnipresence:
"Thou shalt have a place also without the camp, whither thou shalt go forth abroad:
And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee:
For the LORD thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy: that he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from thee."

"And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen."

"And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself."


If God is omnipresent, he would not have to walk anywhere. Some Christians use the excuse that God was playing some "hide and seek" game with Adam, even claiming that this passage shows God's "sense of humor". God's sense of humor! Tell that to the 42 children he slaughtered for making fun of one of His prophets.
The same for if he is omnipotent. If he was omniscient he would not have had to ask their whereabouts.

If God was omnipresent (and omnibenevolent), why then did He not appear in ALL nations equally at once? Why did He only appear to the Jews? Why was He their tribal god?


With several quotations from free thought, I thought I'd post this to see what replies I might get. My point of this is to state that, as an Agnostic Atheist, I thought that there could be a higher creater or being of some sort, but not the father of Jesus Christ. After speaking with my friend, I'm on the edge of the border between Agnostic Atheism and Gnostic Atheism.

still really sad that zayne left one direction like you guys don't even know
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ferdinand's post
13-12-2011, 10:49 AM
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
(13-12-2011 10:39 AM)Ferdinand Wrote:  With several quotations from free thought, I thought I'd post this to see what replies I might get. My point of this is to state that, as an Agnostic Atheist, I thought that there could be a higher creater or being of some sort, but not the father of Jesus Christ. After speaking with my friend, I'm on the edge of the border between Agnostic Atheism and Gnostic Atheism.

I take it you are saying you are leaning toward more absolute atheism.

You probably can't find many more committed atheists than me, but even I don't claim absolute knowledge or proof that there are no gods. That said, I am 99.999% sure there aren't for all the usual reasons, e.g. lack of evidence, evident absurdity, monism, ...

So you don't have to struggle with absolutes, IMO.

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
[+] 5 users Like Chas's post
13-12-2011, 11:30 AM
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
(13-12-2011 10:49 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-12-2011 10:39 AM)Ferdinand Wrote:  With several quotations from free thought, I thought I'd post this to see what replies I might get. My point of this is to state that, as an Agnostic Atheist, I thought that there could be a higher creater or being of some sort, but not the father of Jesus Christ. After speaking with my friend, I'm on the edge of the border between Agnostic Atheism and Gnostic Atheism.

I take it you are saying you are leaning toward more absolute atheism.

You probably can't find many more committed atheists than me, but even I don't claim absolute knowledge or proof that there are no gods. That said, I am 99.999% sure there aren't for all the usual reasons, e.g. lack of evidence, evident absurdity, monism, ...

So you don't have to struggle with absolutes, IMO.

I'd second this response. I've heard Richard Dawkins make essentially the same statement that Chas does. In fact, the thought is expressed in his book, The God Delusion.
Without going back to the original source to make sure I have this right, he proposed a spectrum from 1-7.
1=the person who knows there is a God with absolutely no doubt (he and I are not sure this can exist without pretty extreme delusion)
7=the atheist who knows there is NO God with absolutely no doubt.
He puts himself at a 6. (In an interview with Bill Maher, he slid this up to something like 6.5 or 6.9 Smile ).

"All that is necessary for the triumph of Calvinism is that good Atheists do nothing." ~Eric Oh My
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Erxomai's post
13-12-2011, 11:42 AM (This post was last modified: 13-12-2011 12:25 PM by kingschosen.)
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
Hey Ferdy, as I Christian, I feel I can answer your questions. Keep in mind, my interpretation of God is different from many Christians. I do feel, though, that my beliefs are more consistent - maybe not as palatable - but consistent with what the Bible says and with an omni-all God.

Quote:God is supposedly omnipotent, meaning all-powerful and all-doing.
1) there are instances in the bible where God in fact cannot do everything.
2) if you tell an omnipotent being of sorts to destroy itself, it cannot do so, because God is said to be mortal, eternal, and omnipresent.

1) Can't do... or choose not to do. There is a difference.
2) I went into this in "Ask a Theist" thread. This is what I posted:
Ok, I really want to go into some detail on this. Just to let you know (you might not care), but Christians roll their eyes at these particular questions. Atheists and non-believers like to ask this and it's akin to a Creationists telling an Evolutionist that if we came from monkeys then how come we still have monkeys. You think it's your ace-in-the-hole, but theologically speaking it's more of a facepalm. If you really, really want to annoy Christians when you're debating them, keep asking this question in some form and make them extensively and exhaustively explain it. Oh and use semantics on them too. They'll start to rage pretty quickly (need to stop giving y'all tactics <_<).

Anyhoo, the explanation: the question is a contradiction. God cannot contradict himself. Also, the question is a fallacy of semantics (as aforementioned). God is all powerful, therefore He cannot be something that He isn't. If He creates something that defies His power then we've created a circular paradox. And while, it's lulzy for you, it isn't a fair question to the theist. If you REALLY want to annoy an Arminian Christian, use this same tactic when addressing free will and omniscience... if they counter with, "well God is all powerful, so He gave us the power to be able to choose", then ask them how an all powerful God can relinquish His power to a human? Doesn't that take away from His omnipotence.

You see, God is either all power or He isn't. Since God is all powerful He cannot create a paradox about His power. But, as I've stated, if you want to get lulzy with Christians, keep hammering this.


Quote:If He is all powerful, why is He unable to release humanity from the penalty of Original Sin?

Man was CREATED to sin by God's choice. It IS God's purpose and plan for humanity to sin, so as stated above, God cannot contradict Himself by contradicting His original plan. Does that make sense?

Quote:If you say that He is able to, but that He chooses not to, then how can you claim that He is all-good?

He is not "all-good". He is sovereign. His plan supersedes what we think is "good". His morality stands on His own laurels - not ours.

Quote:Or the most compassionate? If He were all-powerful and all-good, He would have simply erased the Original Sin, and let people be judged on their own actions, not those of someone they never knew. He would have simply eliminated Adam and Eve, and started again (and this time, take the Tree out of the Garden), thus releasing all the other people who would ever live from the sin supposedly committed by the first man and woman.

Aforementioned, it was God's original plan for man to sin. If man does not sin, then the Son has no purpose. Man WAS NOT created to be perfect. That was never the plan. The plan was for man to sin so that Jesus would have a purpose.

Quote:If God is omniscient, he should NEVER change his mind. Think about that carefully. How could someone who knows the future change his mind? Changing his mind means that he did not know what he was going to do or what was going to happen, and shows his uncertainty. But the bible is full of instances where God changes his mind.
The Bible also expectates of how God repeatedly changes his mind. One may argue that He knew that He would change His mind, and that He knew He would regret these things, but then you have to admit that He did not truly change his mind, and His regret was not real regret-- in other words the bible becomes deceitful and you cannot trust what it says.

This is, indeed, and tough concept. The easy cop-out is to say "that it was God's plan all along". While this is valid, there are also some more in depth explanations.

http://www.pytlik.com/observe/faith/mindchange.html

The author goes into the original language here:
The Hebrew word "Nacham"

The Hebrew word "nacham" (pronounced nawkam) is almost always translated into English as "change one's mind." However, careful study reveals that this is the proper meaning in only a few Scriptural circumstances. It does not automatically mean to change one's mind or repent.

Nacham can have several meanings, but it generally means to turn or change direction, though it can mean to change one's mind. It contains no association with wrongdoing, though it can suggest pity or making a change with a heavy sigh. Translations which automatically interpret this as saying that God "changed His mind" are not necessarily wrong, but incomplete. The King James Version translated 'nacham' as "repented," but the meaning of that word has changed so much over the past 500 years. Today, repentance is always associated with erroneous behavior that is being corrected. In the 16th Century, the word "repent" had far less ominous undertones. Then, it simply meant to make a dramatic change in direction.


I'll research more for you, and I'll try to get you some more information in the future.

Quote:Omnibenevolent means that God only does things that are good. Period. Is everything in this world good? He Himself will let you know that He is not omnibenevolent. Isaiah 45:7 "I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these things." Jeremiah 18:11 "Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you." I Kings 22:23 "The Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee." Why would He do these things if He only does that which is good? The bible is filled with examples of god doing evil deeds.

Not sure where the misconception of omnibenevolence comes from because this implies that no bad ever comes to God's people - which is obviously not true and is unbiblical. God created all things - this includes all evil things (sin). Moreover, because of this, God's purpose and plan was able to be served. As a result, there are those that are damned by no choice of their own. This is so very evident in the Bible, and how any Christian can deny this, I don't know. My belief is that God chooses damnation and salvation for people. A human plays a 0% role in their salvation.

Quote:Omnipresence:
"Thou shalt have a place also without the camp, whither thou shalt go forth abroad:
And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee:
For the LORD thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy: that he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from thee."

"And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen."

"And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself."

If God is omnipresent, he would not have to walk anywhere. Some Christians use the excuse that God was playing some "hide and seek" game with Adam, even claiming that this passage shows God's "sense of humor".

The language of Genesis is poetic. “Walking” with someone is meant to show an intimacy, a personal relationship. When man fell, that intimacy was strained, and again, keeping to the type of language that was used in Genesis, the broken intimacy is symbolized by Adam’s hiding.

Quote:God's sense of humor! Tell that to the 42 children he slaughtered for making fun of one of His prophets.

The word doesn’t mean “children”. It means “youths” which is more correctly translated as “young adults”. The “children” were probably in their 20s. This doesn’t lessen it, or make it any more baffling, though. As I stated, God is sovereign, and this demonstrates His sovereign wrath.

Quote:The same for if he is omnipotent. If he was omniscient he would not have had to ask their whereabouts.

Back to the poetic language thing.

Quote:If God was omnipresent (and omnibenevolent), why then did He not appear in ALL nations equally at once? Why did He only appear to the Jews? Why was He their tribal god?

God chose the Jews. God has favorites. Any Christian that tells you differently needs to read the Bible.

Quote:With several quotations from free thought, I thought I'd post this to see what replies I might get. My point of this is to state that, as an Agnostic Atheist, I thought that there could be a higher creater or being of some sort, but not the father of Jesus Christ. After speaking with my friend, I'm on the edge of the border between Agnostic Atheism and Gnostic Atheism.

Never stop seeking. Always question. This is the only way you will find truth.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kingschosen's post
13-12-2011, 12:10 PM
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
(13-12-2011 11:42 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  The word doesn’t mean “children”. It means “youths” which is more correctly translated as “young adults”. The “children” were probably in their 20s. This doesn’t lessen it, or make it any more baffling, though. As I stated, God is sovereign, and this demonstrates His sovereign wrath.



[/quote]

This demonstrates that anyone claiming to have God given morals yet still worship this prick is delusional and in need of psychiatric care.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like germanyt's post
13-12-2011, 12:58 PM
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
(13-12-2011 11:42 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Hey Ferdy, as I Christian, I feel I can answer your questions. Keep in mind, my interpretation of God is different from many Christians. I do feel, though, that my beliefs are more consistent - maybe not as palatable - but consistent with what the Bible says and with an omni-all God.
-snip-
lots of blah, blah, blah about a work of fiction and its various translations and interpretations.
- end snip -
Never stop seeking. Always question. This is the only way you will find truth.

Interpreting, or even quoting, the Bible to help an atheist decide between 99% and 100% sure there is no God seems a very wierd thing to do.

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
13-12-2011, 03:40 PM
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
You're not the first person to notice these natural contradictions in God's attributes, Ferdinand, so you can find most of these arguments answered on Wikipedia.

My favorite, which I didn't see listed, is that God cannot be both merciful and just. To be "just" means to give a punishment appropriate to the crime, and to be merciful means to give less punishment than is deserved. However, I don't see this as a true contradiction - I don't see God as being just. After all, He gives the maximum punishment for even the minimum crime (whether you kill 1,000 people or covet one neighbor's oxen, either way you spend an eternity in hell). And His condition for mercy (believing in Him) doesn't have anything to do fixing either the consequences of your crimes or your future capability in committing them.

Another attribute that I have a problem with is God is not immutable if there are things that he once commanded all of his followers to do but now does not. Certainly, if these commands are tied to a certain condition then change is logical (being prepared for Jesus' second coming only makes sense until he comes again), but the laws that have passed away weren't tied to a condition. Atheists like to harp on the fact that Christians eat pig and shellfish. There's no reason why Jesus coming again would suddenly make these foods clean when they had previously been unclean, and if you try to tie them to a physical condition (such as being able to properly cook them now, based on the assumption that they were unclean because they carried disease) then you can apply that to any of God's laws (sex between gays is fine if done with condoms). Otherwise you're applying a double-standard. In summation, the God of the Old Testament is not the God of the New Testament.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Starcrash's post
14-12-2011, 12:44 AM
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
On the 1-7 scale on the belief meter I wonder where I would be?
I have zero, absolute and totally no belief in an all powerful, partly powerful or can do party tricks and tells jokes “god”
But, if I’m wrong and by some infinitely tiny sliver of a chance god comes knocking on my door tomorrow afternoon I’ll spit in his face for all the misery and suffering he has caused or let happen in his megalomaniacal twisted vision of the world.

I’m aiming for a solid 7

My proof for god; the coconut can be a life saving source of food, the shell can be fashioned into utensils and the outer husk is good for bedding and lighting fires.
They keep for long periods of time without refrigeration and can be used as flotation devices.
Truly a versatile and valuable thing to find if shipwrecked or lost.
That’s not the proof…
They are hung 30 feet in the air from a tree with no branches…

There may be a god, but he has a sick sense of humour.

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Karl's post
14-12-2011, 06:16 AM
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
(13-12-2011 11:42 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  1) Can't do... or choose not to do. There is a difference.

Judges 1:19
Quote:And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

The context there is that god told the children of Israel to go ahead and slaughter all Canaanites and take all their lands because he (god) will be with them at all times and they are sure to succeed.

Apparently when it comes to iron chariots, god doesn't see *that* coming and he fails. He doesn't choose to fail, he just fails.

Oh, no Hallucinations 4:11 says the 'gilded sheep should be stewed in rat blood' but Morons 5:16 contradicts it. (Chas)

I would never shake a baby unless the recipe requires it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Malleus's post
14-12-2011, 07:22 AM (This post was last modified: 14-12-2011 07:29 AM by houseofcantor.)
RE: Teeter Tottering on believing.
I'm an 8 on that scale. On another forum, there is a thread called "agnostic atheism" which I jumped on...

But I don't "win arguments," I "radiate crazy." Like a thunderstorm. They're prolly waiting for the rain to stop. Wink
(13-12-2011 11:42 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Never stop seeking. Always question. This is the only way you will find truth.

See that shit right there? KC has an agenda -alla you should have an agenda -but look at the follow-through on this youngster. Handled the absolutes better than god, minor flub on the dismount; 9.7

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: