Why the christian god is unworthy of worship, if he did exist.

[Nichole_R]

Adam and Eve had free will, whether the tree was "walled" or not, whether the snake (the Devil) could talk or not. And they chose to go against God's commandments.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Adam and Eve had free will, whether the tree was "walled" or not, whether the snake (the Devil) could talk or not. And they chose to go against God's commandments.

Bingo.

 

[Me Myself]

No response for http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2710486-post19.html ?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Oh, don´t get me wrong, I love myself

the problem is that I also understand that God knew my decisions before he even made me (comes with omnissience) so logically, if I had been a person that does bad things and is going to hurt a lot of people and that I will go to hell, and he still makes me, he becomes responsable for my eternity of suffering.

I am not saying that Iw ouldn´t be responsable, I am saying that God would be, at least, as responsable, because he knew the consecuences before creating me.

For example, If I have the power of liberate a murderer that pathologically murders everyone and put it in your house. Would I be inocent when he murders all your family? would he be inocent? No. If I knew he was going to kill everyone and I deliberately facilitate it to him both I and him are responsable for all the killings.

In that same way, God would be responsable for eternal damnation of any human.

You are looking to assign blame, first stage thinking. dualistic thinking. Either or thinking. If you think like that, you avoid ever having to place any responsibility on yourself, because, if it is at least in some small part God's responsibility, then he, being the all-powerful thing that he is, should have done something about it. Therefor, I can do exactly what i am doing now without having to put any effort into changing.

If you take it to the next level, stage two thinking, non-dualistic thinking, you start to realize that who is to blame is not the issue, and that forsaking change and growth because 'it's not my fault' is not hurting anyone but yourself.

 

[Me Myself]

You are looking to assign blame, first stage thinking. dualistic thinking. Either or thinking. If you think like that, you avoid ever having to place any responsibility on yourself, because, if it is at least in some small part God's responsibility, then he, being the all-powerful thing that he is, should have done something about it. Therefor, I can do exactly what i am doing now without having to put any effort into changing.

If you take it to the next level, stage two thinking, non-dualistic thinking, you start to realize that who is to blame is not the issue, and that forsaking change and growth because 'it's not my fault' is not hurting anyone but yourself.

You read any of what I said?

1- I think like that truly, and I never had a problem of not thinking myself responsable for my actions, so your argument is ignorant or to the least, mislead.

2-If you had read my line of reason carefully, you would have understood that I am not replacing my responsability with that of God, I am not saying that the fact that every action of mine is God´s responsability makes me any less resopnsable.

See the example: I know this assasin will kill everyone inx house if I let him free. For the porpuse of this example, I have no doubt, I *magically* can hvae a 100% certainty of it. Even though I know it, I let him escape and go into that house, knowing full well each of the horrendous actionos he will do.

Any sane person would say that I am responsable for every horrible action he did. And no sane person would say the assasin is reliefed from his responsability in any way nevertheless.

I am reapeting this, given that my example said it quite clearly.

Now , you are just talking abuot "what wuld happen" if we take this posture, but so far you seem unable to debate that the posture is logical in itself.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Now , you are just talking abuot "what wuld happen" if we take this posture, but so far you seem unable to debate that the posture is logical in itself.

I don't have any interest in debating something you already know the answer to. You are simply reaffirming your first stage, dualistic thinking. But keep in mind, it is not only your example that is dualistic. The fact that you need it to support your way of thinking is also dualistic.

1- I think like that truly, and I never had a problem of not thinking myself responsible for my actions, so your argument is ignorant or to the least, mislead.

But you don't think like that, which makes my point.

2-If you had read my line of reason carefully, you would have understood that I am not replacing my responsibility with that of God, I am not saying that the fact that every action of mine is God´s responsibility makes me any less responsible.

Oh? But we cannot change God. We can only change us. So why blame God in the first place?

See the example: I know this assassin will kill everyone inx house if I let him free. For the porpuse of this example, I have no doubt, I *magically* can have a 100% certainty of it. Even though I know it, I let him escape and go into that house, knowing full well each of the horrendous actions he will do.

Any sane person would say that I am responsible for every horrible action he did. And no sane person would say the assassin is relieved from his responsibility in any way nevertheless.

As I said, you already know the answer to your question. Do you want me to say you're right so that you don't have to change it? Or do you want me to say you're wrong, so that you can declare me insane, and again, you don't have to change it?

Either way, you don't have to do anything. That's my point.

 

[Me Myself]

I don't have any interest in debating something you already know the answer to. You are simply reaffirming your first stage, dualistic thinking. But keep in mind, it is not only your example that is dualistic. The fact that you need it to support your way of thinking is also dualistic.



But you don't think like that, which makes my point.



Oh? But we cannot change God. We can only change us. So why blame God in the first place?



As I said, you already know the answer to your question. Do you want me to say you're right so that you don't have to change it? Or do you want me to say you're wrong, so that you can declare me insane, and again, you don't have to change it?

Either way, you don't have to do anything. That's my point.

It´s like you haven´t read anything I´d said o.o

I think like that. Do you know better than me how I think o.0? what could posibly be your source for that? o.0 You say that having my posture wuold result in not wanting to change things that should be changed abuot oneself, this is proven false by me having my posture and having changed many things that I have disliked about me.

Just because you can take this line of logic and use it badly that doesn´t mean the logic in itself is false.

It´s like saying kitchen knives are bad because you can stab people with them. It is not very sensical.

I don´t get any of what you are anything you are saying about "dualism". My point is non-dualistic, yours is not. I am of the belief that I and God are one, thus, my responsability is his responsability because he made me and knew me whole before doing so, thus I am merely an extention of God. This is by definition not dualistic.

You propose that somehow it´s not Gods fault that he deliberately created what creates bad and suffering in the world. This is dualistic, because you are separating the responsabilities of God´s creation with him.

And to the moment, you have not said one single argument of how it is not God´s fault.

I do apologyze and retire my comment about sanity, so you may response freely. You are very welcome to argument that if I set an assasin into someone´s house fully aware that he will kill everyone in there I am not as guilty as the assasin for everything that he did that I knew he wouldo do when I purposefully put him in the house.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

It´s like you haven´t read anything I´d said o.o

I think like that. Do you know better than me how I think o.0? what could posibly be your source for that? o.0 You say that having my posture wuold result in not wanting to change things that should be changed abuot oneself, this is proven false by me having my posture and having changed many things that I have disliked about me.

Your argument gives me this assumption. You do have a problem with setting the assassin free, or you are calling yourself insane.

A further note, changing things you don't like about yourself is great. It's sometimes even hard. Forgiving yourself for them, standing with them before God in the naked now is always hard. There is no incentive to change from God. He wants you to change the bad things about yourself, but does not force you to. Because it must be your choice, or it means nothing. That, essentially, is the heart of my stance.

I don´t get any of what you are anything you are saying about "dualism". My point is non-dualistic, yours is not. I am of the belief that I and God are one, thus, my responsibility is his responsibility because he made me and knew me whole before doing so, thus I am merely an extension of God. This is by definition not dualistic.

You propose that somehow it´s not Gods fault that he deliberately created what creates bad and suffering in the world. This is dualistic, because you are separating the responsabilities of God´s creation with him.

Partially correct. Whatever responsibility God has, he has fulfilled it. Proving that is beyond impossible, I can only point to examples of it. Experiences, metaphors and the like. No logical proof.

Furthermore, if you are an extension of God, then there is only God. If you truly mean this, you follow his instructions, his will, not your own. What we are arguing then is whether the will of God is malicious or malevolent or whatever word you want to use, or is not.

The only way for you to answer that question is to experience it for yourself. You cannot prove it. It is not a logical conclusion. In fact, as we are noticing in this debate, it is very illogical. That does not make it untrue. Just illogical.

And to the moment, you have not said one single argument of how it is not God´s fault.

God does not need me to defend him, or his actions. Nevertheless, I, stupidly, try to do so.

I do apologize and retire my comment about sanity, so you may response freely. You are very welcome to argument that if I set an assassin into someone´s house fully aware that he will kill everyone in there I am not as guilty as the assassin for everything that he did that I knew he would do when I purposefully put him in the house.

As you say.

 

[Me Myself]

Your argument gives me this assumption. You do have a problem with setting the assassin free, or you are calling yourself insane.

You´ll have to spell it out, because that doesn´t at all collide with my reasoning. Be that I decide to let the assasin go or not, God knew I would and he still created me that way. Whatever I choose, is still my choosing, but it is still God´s responsability.

the same way whatever the assasin decides to do in the hosue it´s his choosing, but it is my responsability if I let him free knwing full well what he wass going to choose.

God. He wants you to change the bad things about yourself, but does not force you to. Because it must be your choice, or it means nothing. That, essentially, is the heart of my stance.

A clockmaker wants the clock to call the hour by itself. He does not force it to tell the hour, he merely creates it that way. Because if the clock can´t tell the hour by itself once it is set into motion, then the clock is worthless.

Furthermore, if you are an extension of God, then there is only God. If you truly mean this, you follow his instructions, his will, not your own.

sigh* I follow both, because my will is an extention of God´s will. If you are too new to this concept take a while to understand it, if you cannot do it or are lazy to do it, by all means you can leave the discussion without further replyings or with the specific aclaration that you can´t follow the worldview.

There is no shame on leaving the discussion if you are unable to keep up due to lack of understanding of the subject discussed, I have done it once or twice.

What we are arguing then is whether the will of God is malicious or malevolent or whatever word you want to use, or is not.

Well, it´s simple. God created all of use knowing full well what would be of us eternally according to abaramic God, right?. Well, if he did, it is his fault that those in hell are in hell, because if he had not created them they would not be suffering in hell for ever and if hell is... well, hell, they probably would prefer never being created. This would be intolerable for a being worthy of worship.

God does not need me to defend him, or his actions. Nevertheless, I, stupidly, try to do so.

My argument is that you are not defending God´s actions. You are defending an erroneous concept of who God and his actions are. I don´t see how this self-deprecating affirmation furthers healthy discussion, if you feel unable to further healthy discussion, I have no quarrel from you stating such and to refrain from replying you further.

As you say.

Ehm... well, then argue:

If I let this killer loose when I am fully aware that he will kill and torture everyone in this house, am I responsable for the effects of his actions?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

You´ll have to spell it out, because that doesn´t at all collide with my reasoning. Be that I decide to let the assassin go or not, God knew I would and he still created me that way. Whatever I choose, is still my choosing, but it is still God´s responsibility.

Okay, so it's both your and God's responsibility (no 'a' in that word). You want God to take his side accordingly? What would that look like? What would you taking yours look like?

A clockmaker wants the clock to call the hour by itself. He does not force it to tell the hour, he merely creates it that way. Because if the clock can´t tell the hour by itself once it is set into motion, then the clock is worthless.

Just because we don't doesn't mean we can't.

sigh* I follow both, because my will is an extention of God´s will.

Yes, it is. And you're concerned about God takingresponsibility for things?

Well, it´s simple. God created all of us knowing full well what would be of us eternally according to abrahamic God, right?

He knows we can be in heaven. He knows that we can be in hell. He hopes that we are in heaven, not hell.

Well, if he did, it is his fault that those in hell are in hell, because if he had not created them they would not be suffering in hell for ever and if hell is... well, hell, they probably would prefer never being created.

They never were created in the first place.

This would be intolerable for a being worthy of worship.

If that is what he did, then yes. Fortunately, it's not.

My argument is that you are not defending God´s actions.

No, I'm not. I'm explaining my experience with God. Call it an erroneous view if you like.

If I let this killer loose when I am fully aware that he will kill and torture everyone in this house, am I responsible for the effects of his actions?

Yes. You are. Now what? What can you do about it? Nothing. God can do something. It's called forgiveness. Experience that, and you'll never ask this question again. You'll have no reason to.

 

[waitasec]

If I let this killer loose when I am fully aware that he will kill and torture everyone in this house, am I responsable for the effects of his actions?

:yes:
and if you were god you wouldn't be worthy of my worship simply because of this scenario...

 

[rageoftyrael]

I'll ask this simple question. Hopefully we can go from there. Are you willing to concede that if an all knowing god creates something, he is responsible not only for them, but for their actions. Are you willing to concede this responsibility?

 

[Me Myself]

They never were created in the first place.

The catholic doctrine states that all humans (including those who are going to hell) were created by God. If this is true, then those humans who went to hell were created by God. Do you not adhere to this catholic doctrine?

Because if they were created by the all knowing God that knows wheter they are gong to hell or not before creating them and he nevertheless created them, then that is a very poor example of compassion.

He knows we can be in heaven. He knows that we can be in hell. He hopes that we are in heaven, not hell.

Then he doesn´t know that we can´t go against what he knows that will happen? Or does he ignores what is going to happen?

If that is what he did, then yes. Fortunately, it's not.

which of these catholic doctrines are wrong? :

1- He knows where will you go (heaven or hell) before creating you (omniscience)

2- Some people are going to hell. (well... Hell )

3- He could have decided not to create those people who he knew would have gone to hell if he created them (omnipotence)

If that is what he did, then yes. Fortunately, it's not.

No, I'm not. I'm explaining my experience with God. Call it an erroneous view if you like.

I do. I also agree that we both understand we are talking about our comprehensions of God and not God itself.

Yes. You are. Now what? What can you do about it? Nothing. God can do something. It's called forgiveness. Experience that, and you'll never ask this question again. You'll have no reason to.

But if I am responsable for the actions of an assassin because I knew before hand what the assasin would do if I did what I did, then it is as you stated at the first post both mine and God´s responsability any suffering that I make other people have and that i experience myself.

Now , what is God´s responsability in this? that if he created me, he knows that things will end up good for me in the end, no matter how much this may take, and that my suffering will not be eternal, no matter how he chose to make me.

That is why in my worldview, noone stays immoral forever. That is why in my worldview, hell can NEVER be eternal.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

The catholic doctrine states that all humans (including those who are going to hell) were created by God. If this is true, then those humans who went to hell were created by God. Do you not adhere to this catholic doctrine?

Hell isn't somewhere you go. It's where you choose to be. So no, I don't.

Because if they were created by the all knowing God that knows whether they are gong to hell or not before creating them and he nevertheless created them, then that is a very poor example of compassion.

There is always a choice to be in Heaven or Hell. Giving us that choice is the greatest example of compassion there is.

Then he doesn´t know that we can´t go against what he knows that will happen? Or does he ignores what is going to happen?

Choice determines where we are, not God.

which of these catholic doctrines are wrong? :

1- He knows where will you go (heaven or hell) before creating you (omniscience)

2- Some people are going to hell. (well... Hell )

3- He could have decided not to create those people who he knew would have gone to hell if he created them (omnipotence)

All of the above.

I do. I also agree that we both understand we are talking about our comprehensions of God and not God itself.

Erroneous according to whom? The Catholic doctrine? You?

But if I am responsible for the actions of an assassin because I knew before hand what the assassin would do if I did what I did, then it is as you stated at the first post both mine and God´s responsibility any suffering that I make other people have and that I experience myself.

Both you and the assassin made your choices. You can also choose to help with the aftermath. You can choose not to. Where you are, heaven or hell, is based on those choices. That the choice is left to us is God's gift to us.

Now , what is God´s responsibility in this? that if he created me, he knows that things will end up good for me in the end, no matter how much this may take, and that my suffering will not be eternal, no matter how he chose to make me.

That is why in my worldview, no one stays immoral forever. That is why in my worldview, hell can NEVER be eternal.

The only eternal hell is the one we put ourselves in.

 

[waitasec]

Hell isn't somewhere you go. It's where you choose to be. So no, I don't....

i would never choose to go to hell...

...Where you are, heaven or hell, is based on those choices.

and what choices are you talking about? does this have to do with subjective morality?

You can also choose to help with the aftermath. You can choose not to.

not only did god choose not to do something god set the whole thing up. right?
by unleashing satan into our minds, something that is a part of what you call a gift from god for some reason...but that's only posits a dilemma if one believes god is benevolent

That the choice is left to us is God's gift to us.

there is no choice but to have choice it isn't a gift we had it all along.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

i would never choose to go to hell...

You would think not.

and what choices are you talking about? does this have to do with subjective morality?

If you want to bring morality into this, you can. It is far more personal than that.

not only did god choose not to do something god set the whole thing up. right?
by unleashing satan into our minds, something that is a part of what you call a gift from god for some reason...but that's only posits a dilemma if one believes god is benevolent

There is no dilemma. Herein lies the choice, at least one of them anyway.

there is no choice but to have choice it isn't a gift we had it all along.

A gift you had all along is still a gift. That is part of the gift in fact.

 

[waitasec]

You would think not.

what is the difference between not choosing and thinking that i don't choose?

If you want to bring morality into this, you can. It is far more personal than that.

then what kind of choices are you talking about?

There is no dilemma. Herein lies the choice, at least one of them anyway.

so you see a difference between me unleashing a murderer who is out to kill
and god unleashing evil/satan? jou got som esssplainin to do :yes:

A gift you had all along is still a gift. That is part of the gift in fact.

a gift is the free transfer of something. choice in this case is already ours...it's implied in the story of the fall...
so i think you are going to have to come up with another word to explain the free transfer of something someone already had...

 

[strikeviperMKII]

what is the difference between not choosing and thinking that i don't choose?

Not what I meant. People don't want to be in hell, that is certain. But many are there, and you don't get there without making the choice to be there. Realizing that is the first step.

so you see a difference between me unleashing a murderer who is out to kill
and god unleashing evil/satan? jou got som esssplainin to do :yes:

a gift is the free transfer of something. choice in this case is already ours...it's implied in the story of the fall...
so i think you are going to have to come up with another word to explain the free transfer of something someone already had...

The goal of life is not to end up in a newer, better, more perfect place, but to realize that in the one you already are in. God gave us the ability to do that freely.

 

[waitasec]

Not what I meant. People don't want to be in hell, that is certain. But many are there, and you don't get there without making the choice to be there. Realizing that is the first step.

i respectfully disagree. there are plenty of willfully ignorant people in the world.

The goal of life is not to end up in a newer, better, more perfect place, but to realize that in the one you already are in.

agreed

God gave us the ability to do that freely.

we have no choice in the matter...
we all know where we are in the here and now...