Rock Beyond Belief

[SuitedAces21 2,722]

Right, that's one argument. That's not what I was talking about.

So you dont want me mixing in what you would do if confronted with the opportunity to prevent your child from being raped?Because obviously you would stop the rape. And you don't want this becuase we can't compare our actions to a hypothetical god's actions? And just becuase you would stop the rape and god doesnt stop rape doesnt mean that god is necessarily evil?Am I following you? If I am, I would say, well, yeah, you can say that. If we assume god, and all that comes with it, then we can't question anything that happens, or if he allows it or doesnt allow it, because he is god and god is always right. But I dont assume that, because there is no evidence to support the existence of such a god. I judge the actions of a supposed god the only way I can, through the eyes of human being who understands that there are certain truths about the human condition. Some pain is good and necessary (vaccine shots) and some pain is never good, and never necessary (rape) and if presented with the opportunity to stop a rape, I would. So i then turn to this supposed god, who by definition can stop all rapes, but doesnt, and I say that supposed god must be evil, or not real. Probalby not real.

[Skeleton Jelly 2]

Am I following you?

Either you're not following me or I'm not following you.I was talking about whether someone who believes in God's plan can also be compassionate.

[vbnautilus 48]

All deaths in evolution are a good thing.

:|

But isn't that still applying our own sensibilities to God? That's my main issue in trying to use something like good or evil to disprove the existence of God.

It's only used to disprove the existence of a specific god: the wholly good kind, which Christianity claims is the one. Seems like the alternative position is pretty meaningless: God is wholly good, but we can't define exactly what that is, because he is just good according to his own sense of it. No matter he what he does, that is part of his being totally good. Even if that involves murdering kids and stuff. But anyways I thought he was pretty clear that compassion was good. So we're just applying his own standards to him. Is he now saying "ha, I didn't mean we should have compassion for everyone, jeez you guys take me so literally! Sometimes death and destruction is the way to go!". Also, if we can't use our own sensibility then we can't evaluate this (or anything) at all..

[JubilantLankyLad 1,957]

Also, if we can't use our own sensibility then we can't evaluate this (or anything) at all..

Now you're getting somewhere!

[Balloon guy 158]

Also, if we can't use our own sensibility then we can't evaluate this (or anything) at all..

This is me waiting for you to post something anywhere about whatever you do with the MRI brain scan thingy where I will tell you why the thing you are doing is X.When you tell me that I am not qualified because of my limited amount of knowledge of your MRI brain scan thingy I will then link this post and make the albeit weak connection to the notion that my proximity to what you do and my ability to judge is is infinitely closer than your proximity to God's wisdom and your ability to judge it.Its going to be really good, if I remember to do it.You should just know that you are toast.

[Balloon guy 158]

Now you're getting somewhere!

You too Jon.What do you do again?Doesn't matter.

[SuitedAces21 2,722]

Either you're not following me or I'm not following you.I was talking about whether someone who believes in God's plan can also be compassionate.

Oh yeah, forget about that stuff. I guess, like everything, it depends on the intent and how you look at. If you think, "god was punishing the japanese for believing in whatever they believe in that isnt what i believe in: so they deserved it," then compassion doesnt appear to be your main concern.But if you think, "god is testing the world. he wants to know if we can unite and help these people. i will fly over to japan and do everything i can," then you seem to be compassionate. so i dont know. my definitive answer: MAYBE.

[Spademan 94]

But isn't that still applying our own sensibilities to God? That's my main issue in trying to use something like good or evil to disprove the existence of God.

To this and BG's version:VB already addressed this point of one of the two issues I was going to comment upon.To elaborate, the "we can't use our lolsmallbrains to know what is really, really 'good', only god can" defense means... it necessarily means, that everything we've come to conclude about compassion, down to the inherent biological reaction people have to seeing someone horribly being mutilated and maimed, is suspect. This claim, by necessity, means that "maybe raping babies is good."There is absolutely no difference between raping babies and not raping babies if you are asserting that nonsense. Who knows? Maybe it's a "good thing". If you go to "no, my religious text forbids that, therefore we know that much." No you don't. Maybe your god was simply tricking you into not raping babies, for some unknown awesome reason that is ultimately "good" in a way only god can understand, and he expects you to work through that trick and get to raping babies. Who the fuck knows? Everything becomes meaningless. The whole idea leads to absurdity.

If you were to take the subset of people who actually help in time of tragedy, you guys think those numbers are going to be significantly skewed towards atheists over Christians? I tend to think it would be pretty even. I don't know that there are, or even can be, statistics on such a thing.

Ok, great. But so what? I see that your focus in this discussion is that people who invoke god don't mean to be callous, necessarily, and it certainly doesn't mean they can't be compassionate.Ok, point noted and I concur. Now: so what? That's fine. That's great. But people being "compassionate" has nothing to do with the validity of their beliefs. If we were to quantify with certainty that Christians were more charitable in general over Muslims or Mormons, that in no way means the Christian god is real, let alone the correct god. Even if one is stupid enough to prop up that kind of argument (as many often are, which is awesome because it's so easy to refute), point them to the Buddhists and tell them it's time to convert. It's just a non-issue.

Well, that's why I made the distinction between the Biblical God and simply a God.

And I've already covered the retreat from any specific god, any textual god, into some nebulous, possibly malevolent, random deist god tailored to survive most logical examination... it falls to parsimony. Snip snip.

[Skeleton Jelly 2]

I got involved in this because I didn't agree with this statement: "Religious faith, on the other hand, erodes compassion." I believe that the idea that atheists must be more compassionate is wrong. That's really all I have an opinion about.The God is imaginary/evil argument was just me thinking outloud and I have no problem admitting that my thinking could be full of holes.Edit: Also, I don't know what parsimony means.

[Balloon guy 158]

To this and BG's version:VB already addressed this point of one of the two issues I was going to comment upon.To elaborate, the "we can't use our lolsmallbrains to know what is really, really 'good', only god can" defense means... it necessarily means, that everything we've come to conclude about compassion, down to the inherent biological reaction people have to seeing someone horribly being mutilated and maimed, is suspect. This claim, by necessity, means that "maybe raping babies is good."There is absolutely no difference between raping babies and not raping babies if you are asserting that nonsense. Who knows? Maybe it's a "good thing". If you go to "no, my religious text forbids that, therefore we know that much." No you don't. Maybe your god was simply tricking you into not raping babies, for some unknown awesome reason that is ultimately "good" in a way only god can understand, and he expects you to work through that trick and get to raping babies. Who the f knows? Everything becomes meaningless. The whole idea leads to absurdity.

You guys are requiring that all things that happen are caused by God because God wanted them to happen this way.The Bible clearly says that God did not want the earth to be this way, but He allowed Adam and Eve to corrupt the earth by bringing sin into the world.So God's plan was for there not to be any bad in the world, but man's involvement resulted in the evil in the world.So ultimately man is responsible for the evil that befalls man.Arguing that God should stop it overlooks the fact that God is in the process of stopping it forever, but His timetable isn't ours. Even so, 6,000 years is a pretty small amount of time compared to eternity.I believe that God can and does step in on occasions, these are called miracles. They are done at His discretion, not ours.

[Balloon guy 158]

Edit: Also, I don't know what parsimony means.

You put it on food to make it look like you are a real chef, but nobody really eats it.

[vbnautilus 48]

This is me waiting for you to post something anywhere about whatever you do with the MRI brain scan thingy where I will tell you why the thing you are doing is X.When you tell me that I am not qualified because of my limited amount of knowledge of your MRI brain scan thingy I will then link this post and make the albeit weak connection to the notion that my proximity to what you do and my ability to judge is is infinitely closer than your proximity to God's wisdom and your ability to judge it.Its going to be really good, if I remember to do it.You should just know that you are toast.

So in this analogy I'm god, right?

You guys are requiring that all things that happen are caused by God because God wanted them to happen this way.The Bible clearly says that God did not want the earth to be this way, but He allowed Adam and Eve to corrupt the earth by bringing sin into the world.So God's plan was for there not to be any bad in the world, but man's involvement resulted in the evil in the world.So ultimately man is responsible for the evil that befalls man.Arguing that God should stop it overlooks the fact that God is in the process of stopping it forever, but His timetable isn't ours. Even so, 6,000 years is a pretty small amount of time compared to eternity.I believe that God can and does step in on occasions, these are called miracles. They are done at His discretion, not ours.

Aaaaand were back to blaming the poor Japanese for their tsunami. But I don't see how your description which takes responsibility out of gods hands (absurd since he knew everything that would happen the instant he created the world and therefore must have wanted it it that way or not had the power to change it) leads to the phrase "it's gods will" in reference to natural disasters.

[Spademan 94]

I got involved in this because I didn't agree with this statement: "Religious faith, on the other hand, erodes compassion." I believe that the idea that atheists must be more compassionate is wrong. That's really all I have an opinion about.

Well, if the faith is real, and not just lip service, but if someone really believes in the particular claims of their cult, religious faith most certainly does lead to eroded and faulty "compassion". The very idea of hell is one perfect example. I already launched into a tirade earlier considering that disgusting and reprehensible "belief".

Edit: Also, I don't know what parsimony means.

"Parsimony is the use of the simplest or most frugal route of explanation available." My friends and I hear a noise in my closet. We go examine the closet. The closet is empty other than a single box on the ground. I tell my friends I put that box on the shelf earlier that morning.Friend one observes: Well, the shelf is tilted forward. It probably fell off due to gravity, and the lack of friction on the smooth surface of the shelf. We have plenty of evidence for gravity, and understand the properties of friction. It probably just slid off the shelf.Friend two observes: Well, perhaps there was a cat in the closet and it knocked the box down. Since there isn't a cat here now... wait... *opens box*, ok, no cat in the closet, the cat probably ran out when we opened the door. Hmm, the door to the room is closed. *we search the room, every nook, no cat.* Ok, since we cannot find the cat, it must be invisible. It's probably still tangible, since it had to be tangible to move the box, but it's moving around while we look so we don't feel it. My conclusion is that there is a cat that, in some way we can't explain, turned invisible, and this cat pushed the box and made it slide off the tilted shelf and fall due to gravity.We choose option one due to parsimony. It is a valid and reasonable explanation that does not need to resort to extra, and in particular, spectacular claims to account for the event.

[Spademan 94]

You put it on food to make it look like you are a real chef, but nobody really eats it.

Heh.

Aaaaand were back to blaming the poor Japanese for their tsunami. But I don't see how your description which takes responsibility out of gods hands (absurd since he knew everything that would happen the instant he created the world and therefore must have wanted it it that way or not had the power to change it) leads to the phrase "it's gods will" in reference to natural disasters.

Answered it well enough. Different road than I would have taken, but just as effective.

[Skeleton Jelly 2]

Well, if the faith is real, and not just lip service, but if someone really believes in the particular claims of their cult, religious faith most certainly does lead to eroded and faulty "compassion". The very idea of hell is one perfect example. I already launched into a tirade earlier considering that disgusting and reprehensible "belief".

Why? (I don't mean that in any sort of sarcastic or ironic way.)

We choose option one due to parsimony. It is a valid and reasonable explanation that does not need to resort to extra, and in particular, spectacular claims to account for the event.

Cats are pretty sneaky.

[Spademan 94]

Why? (I don't mean that in any sort of sarcastic or ironic way.)

We, as a society, do not torture and burn people to death. Murderers, rapists, sociopaths, or thieves. We recognize torture and burning people to death is cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual. Cruel. A person, as per his religion, who believes that their God is going to torture and burn not rapists, or murderers, or sociopaths... all of that can even be forgiven in some versions, LOL, not people based on their actions or how good they were, but simply because they don't "accept the undead jesus into their hearts... for all eternity has a solid grasp of compassion... how?I am honestly shocked that this isn't blatant.*edit*In case what you mean is, "Just because god might torture and burn people who good and compassionate lives for all eternity doesn't mean that the people who follow him would want that, or would feel compassion toward those being burned and tortured for all eternity".Ok. This fails in one of two ways.1. Either they disagree with their god concept that torturing and burning people, people who lead good and compassionate lives, for all eternity is the right thing to do, in which case they shouldn't follow him. or2. They, as has been mentioned here, think they "can't know the mind of god" and just "have faith" that whatever the fuck he does is a-ok. In which case they should feel zero compassion toward people being tortured or burned, here on in the afterlife, because "lolwhoknows? Only god that's who".As always, a third option would be not to retreat into magical thinking and drop the nonsense altogether.

[Roll the Bones 74]

The bolded is why I said the book was mostly boring.We'll have to have the satan's existence part another time, it honestly seems kind of argumentative for the sake of being argumentative, but I will admit I have not ever looked at it from your perspective so I will give you the benefit of the doubt for now that there is a reasonable argument that satan is not the devil, and doesn't show up much and why.The exegesis of what the interaction between satan and God means is deeper than just God saying: "What's up?" And satan saying: "Nuttin. Was up dog?"There was a reason for God asking satan where he had been. God already knew where satan had physically been, and He knew what satan thought about his position in the earth. So why else would God ask satan this? That is the reasoning behind exploring deeper the meaning of what God's question meant. When you see God's promise to Abraham in Gen 13:17Once you establish that satan was laying claim to the world because he was now walking all over it, then you see what satan was implying, that he was now the ruler of the earth.Why God allowed Job to suffer is one of the many great theological debates about the existence of evil in the world.But Job's friends are a great example of man trying to make the case that he knows the mind of God. This is folly, man does not know what God thinks, nor is he privy to enough information to judge God's plans and actions.It gets back to the ethical dilemma question: If you can go back in time and kill Hitler as a child, would you?"From a person in the 1910's perspective, your actions are evil, from a person with our knowledge, it would be good because of how bad Hitler was. From God's perspective it would be ? He knows how Hitler affected every single person from the moment he was born till the end of all time. How every single action changed things for every one, and how those changes changed things etc. That amount of info kind of makes our info seem a bit weak sauce to go tossing around like we are logic studs. I guess it gets back to humility for me. God has a plan and I am not worthy to dissect His plans and judge the methods He chooses to employ. Therefore I accept that God's plan is perfect and that following His plan for me is the best I can hope to accomplish in this world.Yes, it allows all God's actions to be looked at with a positive spin, when there are times I have no possible justification from my perspective ( tsunami ), but I am not basing this on my desire to be ignorant, I am basing it on my acknowledgment on my ignorance. I see this as a critical difference.

There was a reason for God asking satan where he had been. God already knew where satan had physically been, and He knew what satan thought about his position in the earth. So why else would God ask satan this? That is the reasoning behind exploring deeper the meaning of what God's question meant. When you see God's promise to Abraham in Gen 13:17Once you establish that satan was laying claim to the world because he was now walking all over it, then you see what satan was implying, that he was now the ruler of the earth.

No offense, but I really don't see how you could construe it into that. Did Satan say that he had been walking on the earth and that he was ruling it? Anywhere? I mean you can jump forward with your knowldedge of Satan from the NT and try to backtrack and make something out of it I suppose, but that wasn't in the book of Job. Think about it, if Satan was laying claim to the earth why did he have to ask God's permission for anything, or to torture Job? Why didn't God just tell Satan no or smite him or something? I mean this is the chapter in which God rails on for eternity about how powerful he is, right?If God was so smart and knew where satan had been and what he wanted, why did God let Satan "incite" him into doing something so horrible? And finally, you must have thought Fatal Attraction was a story about Bunny Stews, cause you don't seem to be able to understand plots very well.

[Roll the Bones 74]

Why God allowed Job to suffer is one of the many great theological debates about the existence of evil in the world.

I don't see why? It says it right in the book. He had "no good reason" for doing it.

[Skeleton Jelly 2]

A person, as per his religion, who believes that their God is going to torture and burn not rapists, or murderers, or sociopaths... all of that can even be forgiven in some versions, LOL, not people based on their actions or how good they were, but simply because they don't "accept the undead jesus into their hearts... for all eternity has a solid grasp of compassion... how?I am honestly shocked that this isn't blatant.

Are we not looking at compassion as the same thing? Google...dictionary.com...1. a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering. I'm still not following you.

[Roll the Bones 74]

I guess it gets back to humility for me. God has a plan and I am not worthy to dissect His plans and judge the methods He chooses to employ. Therefore I accept that God's plan is perfect and that following His plan for me is the best I can hope to accomplish in this world.Yes, it allows all God's actions to be looked at with a positive spin, when there are times I have no possible justification from my perspective ( tsunami ), but I am not basing this on my desire to be ignorant, I am basing it on my acknowledgment on my ignorance. I see this as a critical difference.

Well, I see it too. Bad things happen that make no rational sense, but you choose to except that God has a reason, is all powerful and that you will abide by his rules for some possible quarter later. You are willing to enslave yourself to his power, not his justice here on earth. You are afraid of his power. You are a slave to it. I choose to live free.

[Spademan 94]

Are we not looking at compassion as the same thing? Google...dictionary.com...1. a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering. I'm still not following you.

Edited while you were posting to address just this point. At least it was addressing what I assume to be this point.

[Roll the Bones 74]

No offense, but I really don't see how you could construe it into that. Did Satan say that he had been walking on the earth and that he was ruling it? Anywhere? I mean you can jump forward with your knowldedge of Satan from the NT and try to backtrack and make something out of it I suppose, but that wasn't in the book of Job. Think about it, if Satan was laying claim to the earth why did he have to ask God's permission for anything, or to torture Job? Why didn't God just tell Satan no or smite him or something? I mean this is the chapter in which God rails on for eternity about how powerful he is, right?If God was so smart and knew where satan had been and what he wanted, why did God let Satan "incite" him into doing something so horrible? And finally, you must have thought Fatal Attraction was a story about Bunny Stews, cause you don't seem to be able to understand plots very well.

What I am saying is that satan (the adversary) was a bit character the writer invented to help set up the story. The story was about how much people should endure and still believe in him, because he is so powerful. My point is that the story didn't deliver due to the fact the writer or the story missed out on "why" Job was worshipping God. He did it because of justice and his power, not simply because he was a bully. It was just a messed up story.Oh, and certainly not something to bet your life on.

[Spademan 94]

Are we not looking at compassion as the same thing? Google...dictionary.com...1. a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering. I'm still not following you.

I haven't been as clear as I could have been, so let me flesh this out a bit more.I'll come from a different angle and maybe clear it up.Someone who claims that God's actions are always justified, someone who actually believes in a God that sends people to hell for simply not accepting Jesus, would feel no compassion or sympathy toward a good person being tortured and burned for all eternity by their god. To give an example, if I see a four year old girl trip and fall into a man on the street. The man punches the girl in the face and breaks her nose. I would feel outrage at the man, sympathy for the girl.If I see a 35 year old man pull a knife out and start stabbing a woman in the neck, and that woman's husband punches the assailant in the face, breaking his nose, I would feel no outrage at the husband or sympathy for the assailant. His "punishment" of the assailant was justified. If the believer feels that gods actions are justified, whence then compassion?

[Balloon guy 158]

No offense, but I really don't see how you could construe it into that. Did Satan say that he had been walking on the earth and that he was ruling it? Anywhere? I mean you can jump forward with your knowldedge of Satan from the NT and try to backtrack and make something out of it I suppose, but that wasn't in the book of Job. Think about it, if Satan was laying claim to the earth why did he have to ask God's permission for anything, or to torture Job? Why didn't God just tell Satan no or smite him or something? I mean this is the chapter in which God rails on for eternity about how powerful he is, right?If God was so smart and knew where satan had been and what he wanted, why did God let Satan "incite" him into doing something so horrible? And finally, you must have thought Fatal Attraction was a story about Bunny Stews, cause you don't seem to be able to understand plots very well.

You yourself use other parts of the Bible to build on the character of God in Job, so I am allowed to as well. If Job was our only book in the Bible I would be hard pressed to explain it as well.

I don't see why? It says it right in the book. He had "no good reason" for doing it.

Is no good reason what it says? Or your paraphrase? Because we know about your paraphrases...

Well, I see it too. Bad things happen that make no rational sense, but you choose to except that God has a reason, is all powerful and that you will abide by his rules for some possible quarter later. You are willing to enslave yourself to his power, not his justice here on earth. You are afraid of his power. You are a slave to it. I choose to live free.

Are you free? How is your life different than mine? The rain falls on the just and the unjust. We can cite a couple of examples of bad people prospering and good people suffering, are we not both stuck with trying to find an explanation?I approach it with the notion that God has a purpose for all mankind. You want the examples to define God. Not an unreasonable method, but flawed when you state that you are able to understand the Mind of God.

What I am saying is that satan (the adversary) was a bit character the writer invented to help set up the story. The story was about how much people should endure and still believe in him, because he is so powerful. My point is that the story didn't deliver due to the fact the writer or the story missed out on "why" Job was worshipping God. He did it because of justice and his power, not simply because he was a bully. It was just a messed up story.Oh, and certainly not something to bet your life on.

I think the opposite, the story conveys the sense that God has complete authority to conduct Himself as He sees fit. I also see elsewhere that God is a Gracious and Benevolent God, but one that is also to be respected and held in awe.As I've said, using the book of Job as your only source, yea, you are probably more right than me, but Job isn't our only source, it is one of many.Now be honest...did you read about what the atheist think about Job before you read it? Or after?

[Balloon guy 158]

So in this analogy I'm god, right?

God help us...

Aaaaand were back to blaming the poor Japanese for their tsunami. But I don't see how your description which takes responsibility out of gods hands (absurd since he knew everything that would happen the instant he created the world and therefore must have wanted it it that way or not had the power to change it) leads to the phrase "it's gods will" in reference to natural disasters.

I have a plan for my kids, go to school do right become republicans...you know, succeed in life.They have the freedom to reject that and face the consequences.God has a plan for mankind, if we followed it, we would be in Paradise, we chose not too and as such we are in a decaying and brutal world.But God knowing about the consequences of sin isn't the same as God making sin happen.I really don't see how you can arrive at the blaming the Japanese anyway ( although I am not saying they didn't deserve it for the whole Pokemon thing )