Who are you to question God? really...

[McBell]

As you like Iti. These are pretty bold claims you have " None of the events in the bible happened",God does nothing,God is no where" Are you sure?

Ironic you accusing others of bold claims....

 

[Lady B]

Ironic you accusing others of bold claims....

Yes from your pov, I am bold. But from my pov, I can backup all my claims by scripture and so feel justified in my claims whether you believe them or not. I am not arguing Iti's claims, they are his, I just asked if he is sure.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes from your pov, I am bold. But from my pov, I can backup all my claims by scripture and so feel justified in my claims whether you believe them or not. I am not arguing Iti's claims, they are his, I just asked if he is sure.

It seems to me that in your other thread, you effectively told me that you can't back up your claims by scripture unless they're already convinced that the Bible is true.

 

[Lady B]

It seems to me that in your other thread, you effectively told me that you can't back up your claims by scripture unless they're already convinced that the Bible is true.

I can't prove my claims to you, but I surely feel justified in my claims based on my supporting Scripture. While it is meaningless to you, It is evidence to me. I am sure Iti has a basis for his beliefs and his own support that he holds as his evidence, I did not argue him in it, as it is futile for me to do so....

I am just curious if he is sure,that's all.

 

[Ouroboros]

Question God?

Sure. Why not. I think it's our duty.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I can't prove my claims to you, but I surely feel justified in my claims based on my supporting Scripture. While it is meaningless to you, It is evidence to me.

I'm put in mind of a quote from Philip K. Dick:

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

It seems to me that you're arguing that the truth of the Bible goes away if you stop believing in it. This suggests to me certain implications about whether the Bible is actually true.

 

[LuisDantas]

Question God?

Sure. Why not. I think it's our duty.

Ain't that the truth?

 

[McBell]

Yes from your pov, I am bold. But from my pov, I can backup all my claims by scripture and so feel justified in my claims whether you believe them or not. I am not arguing Iti's claims, they are his, I just asked if he is sure.

Every single person who, like yourself, claims to speak for the Biblical deity uses scripture to "back up all their claims".

In fact, using scripture to "back up all their claims" has led to over 10,000 different Christian denominations.

And I bet every last one of them, like yourself, feel justified in their claims whether you or anyone else believes them or not.

So like I said, it is rather ironic you accusing others of bold claims.

 

[Harrytic]

Who says God is infallible or all-knowing? Sure the bible writers want us to believe it, but that doesn’t make it so. In fact the bible paints a picture of a flawed and even malevolent creator. One that is not all-knowing. Just like all the other Gods out there.

If I were to create a robot and give it a freewill and a mind of its own, should I then insist it never question me or challenge me? Of course not, not unless I am a creator that wants to control my creation. But no, I gave it a free will and a mind of its own. I even created in with ACTUAL flaws and allowed it to be influenced by other beings, so YES I expect that it will question me sometimes and would be surprised… and yes, DISAPPOINTED if it didn’t! I want it to work the way I designed it after all! And I am quite capable of rationally explaining myself to those who challenge me. I am not offended by having my authority challenged and I defnitely do not need other robots to speak on my behalf.

 

[Harrytic]

Lady B,
To be honest, one would have to believe in the Christian God for your rant to apply to them.
Those who "hate" or "blame" the Christian God for anything are not atheists or agnostics. At the least, they are anti-theists, at the most, angry theists.

Yes from your pov, I am bold. But from my pov, I can backup all my claims by scripture and so feel justified in my claims whether you believe them or not. I am not arguing Iti's claims, they are his, I just asked if he is sure.

I guess then that makes Iti oj even bolder than you!

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Who says God is infallible or all-knowing? Sure the bible writers want us to believe it, but that doesn’t make it so. In fact the bible paints a picture of a flawed and even malevolent creator. One that is not all-knowing. Just like all the other Gods out there.

If I were to create a robot and give it a freewill and a mind of its own, should I then insist it never question me or challenge me? Of course not, not unless I am a creator that wants to control my creation. But no, I gave it a free will and a mind of its own. I even created in with ACTUAL flaws and allowed it to be influenced by other beings, so YES I expect that it will question me sometimes and would be surprised… and yes, DISAPPOINTED if it didn’t! I want it to work the way I designed it after all! And I am quite capable of rationally explaining myself to those who challenge me. I am not offended by having my authority challenged and I defnitely do not need other robots to speak on my behalf.

To be honest, one of the main lessons that human creative minds come up with, is among others, the idea that independent robots are actually dangerous to their creators.

Were I to build such a creature the FIRST thing I'd do is prevent it from questioning me.

 

[Ouroboros]

To be honest, one of the main lessons that human creative minds come up with, is among others, the idea that independent robots are actually dangerous to their creators.

Were I to build such a creature the FIRST thing I'd do is prevent it from questioning me.

If the robots were dangerous to me, I would make it so it couldn't hurt me.

If it couldn't hurt me, I wouldn't care if it proposed questions about me or my decisions or not, unless I was so self-absorbed and prideful that I didn't want to be questions just because of some narcissistic inclination. But if I was a decent and honest guy, I might even prefer a robot who could tell me answers to questions I had, or even come up with input about me that I hadn't thought of. But that would require that I was somewhat decent.

So... God, doesn't want to be questions by an unthreatening creature he made on a small planet in a large universe... hmm... God is a narcissistic self-absorbed egotist. If God is a good guy (as some suggest), then he wouldn't mind--no, probably prefer--if we spoke our minds. Why else did he give us a mind?

 

[McBell]

If the robots were dangerous to me, I would make it so it couldn't hurt me.

If it couldn't hurt me, I wouldn't care if it proposed questions about me or my decisions or not, unless I was so self-absorbed and prideful that I didn't want to be questions just because of some narcissistic inclination. But if I was a decent and honest guy, I might even prefer a robot who could tell me answers to questions I had, or even come up with input about me that I hadn't thought of. But that would require that I was somewhat decent.

So... God, doesn't want to be questions by an unthreatening creature he made on a small planet in a large universe... hmm... God is a narcissistic self-absorbed egotist. If God is a good guy (as some suggest), then he wouldn't mind--no, probably prefer--if we spoke our minds. Why else did he give us a mind?

it has been tried:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

Problem is, like is explained in the movie I-Robot with Wil Smith, we disagree with the logic conclusion of said rules.

 

[Ouroboros]

it has been tried:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

Problem is, like is explained in the movie I-Robot with Wil Smith, we disagree with the logic conclusion of said rules.

Don't forget the zeroth law.

The movie was crap. Didn't follow the spirit of Asimov's thoughts about the robot laws.

Still, the laws don't say "don't question the humans". And the robots did question humanity in the books, and influenced and saved humanity. (Daneel wasn't it?) So, creating an artificial intelligence, it would behove us to have it help us. That's why we create it most of the time. That's why we have computers. To help us. Sure, they serve us, but they also solve questions we have.

For instance, there are today computer systems that solve managerial problems at large corporations. It's a very advanced expert system that can tell the manager what decision to make. Now, that is really allowing the created to question its creators.

So why would humans be any different?

 

[InsurgoInsurgiInsurrect]

Think about it my friend, who are you exactly? How is it that you can be so arrogant? So self worthy to say this God of Abraham is so unfair, so unjust, so evil minded? I fear for your attempt at bravery within your peers, stand alone and put yourself standing before this God you deny you know, Yes you know him, you deceive yourself well enough to say you don't know him, but He has written himself on every heart, most of you have studied his word to use it against his own...You know him....

Simply put you are arguing for a new god. Prior to your argument others have made a similar argument for their god. The god of abraham or the greek gods or the egyptian gods or whatever you suppose is the truth and wish others supposed as well.

Most people I know who deny god do not remember the billions of years before they were born and feel the billions of years after they are dead will be much the same. Your argument is the billions of years before they were born were meaningless and it is this short time here on earth when they are born that matters and should someone come up to you with a bible and tell you of jesus than your only option is to believe because who are you to do otherwise?

As if someone that believes in another god could not make the same argument for their belief as you did?

It makes no sense because it relies on your personal upbringing and feelings. A devout christian in america looks at a devout follower of another religion who believes in self flagellation as crazy but they also look at people who don't share their exact belief as crazy as well.

Your question is ironically really addressed to yourself. Who are you to question the beliefs of others who believe with just as much passion as you believe about your own beliefs?

I can't answer that question for you. Who are you to question god is a question you should really ask yourself as by believing in your specific god you are in fact questioning other gods that are not of whatever particular faith system you have been exposed too.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

If the robots were dangerous to me, I would make it so it couldn't hurt me.?

Right, that was the spirit of my reply.

Can't argue much with the rest

 

[s2a]

Well after a brief look-over at that thread, I can only say your lying to yourself in claiming that is all it would take. Remember "God dwelt with us and we knew him not",many maricles were performed and forgotten or rejected. Men choose what they will accept as the criteria for belief and will change it when unsatisfied by the very specticle they craved.It is enough for me what God has done and written. Untill and If you are ever drawn to believe, you will never be satisfied by any writings in the sky, God is the one who opens your eyes to see the maricles he has given,untill that time you will be blind to anythings of God.

Your testimony is noted...

Your rebuttal is... well...

FWIW, what I wrote is still in earnest and genuine...

Regrettable that your best reply is that I seem self-delusional...

I'm not, I promise.

But I confess, I do not retain the faith/belief you claim as your own.

Fair enough?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Is this lady in the OP for real?

I'll say what I damn well please about any god. They can bow down and kiss my feet. Humans are realer Gods and Goddesses than the Bible god and far more worthy of worship. Blasphemy is an emotionally liberating experience and that's why us Satanists tend to like it so much. It's empowering.

"Even Jesus worships me. I bow down to none." - Otep

Besides, if the Bible god is as big, bad and petty as the book says, he'll just send me on to hell since he's a humorless ******* after I kick the bucket. Big whoop. So don't worry about what people say, lady.

 

[psychoslice]

I don't question fairy tales, so it doesn't bother me god thinks.

 

[s2a]

Is this lady in the OP for real?

I'll say what I damn well please about any god. They can bow down and kiss my feet. Humans are realer Gods and Goddesses than the Bible god and far more worthy of worship. Blasphemy is an emotionally liberating experience and that's why us Satanists tend to like it so much. It's empowering.

"Even Jesus worships me. I bow down to none." - Otep

Besides, if the Bible god is as big, bad and petty as the book says, he'll just send me on to hell since he's a humorless ******* after I kick the bucket. Big whoop. So don't worry about what people say, lady.

Then perhaps amongst we lesser people, we hold your perspectives in low esteem . I'll keep yer seat warm in that Hell you aspire to seem eventually relevant within.