Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If that were true then god chose to subject humanity to suffering and misery for countless generations and billions of people (including innocent newborns who had no part in the Fall) when he had an infinite repertoire of less painful alternatives available to him -- not to mention an infinite repertoire of how he could have made humanity and the rules and regulations and penalties he could have promulgated. He could for instance simply decide that fornication is okay, or made people to have no interest in it in the first place. Or he could have decided that wearing mixed fabrics was okay. Talk about not picking your battles!
You are basically saying that god is a sadist in that he chooses human suffering and punishment over protection and guidance. If your child "insisted" on putting his hand on a hot stove, you could say he "agreed to it" and that the consequences were his choice and explained in advance ... or you could avoid being accused of neglect and do the right thing, intervene before he hurts himself and patiently train him to avoid hurting himself. Most parents would do that much, even though, unlike god, they had no choice in how they made the child and didn't have the power, like god would, to make the child any way they wanted the child to be in the first place.
God would also in your scenario have to be a sadist in that he made us as we are and then rejects us for being as we are. Even if you argue we weren't that way before the Fall, it is obvious that Adam and Eve were destined to eat of the forbidden fruit anyway. All this BS over a piece of fruit?!
Your god is not god in the conventional sense in that he has limitations on what he knows and/or how he can choose to intervene and/or is limited in his compassion and mercy beyond what even some humans are capable of producing. And all this mayhem is a result of the desires and weaknesses he chose to bestow on humanity and the rules and penalties he chose to put in place despite our obvious inability to follow them assiduously even when we try very hard to do so.
In your favor, you believe in universal reconciliation, but even there, you have to account for human suffering in the meantime. I can't imagine that you'd be okay with your loved ones being sentenced to torture on the rack simply because you believe that they will eventually be released, healed and sent on their way, never to be tortured again.
Of course I don't believe the legends in the first place. I don't hold a god who doesn't exist responsible for the human condition. I am simply arguing from your framework of understanding and belief to show how it is self-inconsistent. Either god loves and cares or he doesn't. If he condemns humanity for it being human, is willing to allow death into the picture for any reason then he is callously ignoring human pain and suffering and loss and grief, even inflicting it effectively by his own actions and policies.
If that were true then god chose to subject humanity to suffering and misery for countless generations and billions of people (including innocent newborns who had no part in the Fall) when he had an infinite repertoire of less painful alternatives available to him -- not to mention an infinite repertoire of how he could have made humanity and the rules and regulations and penalties he could have promulgated. He could for instance simply decide that fornication is okay, or made people to have no interest in it in the first place. Or he could have decided that wearing mixed fabrics was okay. Talk about not picking your battles!
You are basically saying that god is a sadist in that he chooses human suffering and punishment over protection and guidance. If your child "insisted" on putting his hand on a hot stove, you could say he "agreed to it" and that the consequences were his choice and explained in advance ... or you could avoid being accused of neglect and do the right thing, intervene before he hurts himself and patiently train him to avoid hurting himself. Most parents would do that much, even though, unlike god, they had no choice in how they made the child and didn't have the power, like god would, to make the child any way they wanted the child to be in the first place.
God would also in your scenario have to be a sadist in that he made us as we are and then rejects us for being as we are. Even if you argue we weren't that way before the Fall, it is obvious that Adam and Eve were destined to eat of the forbidden fruit anyway. All this BS over a piece of fruit?!
Your god is not god in the conventional sense in that he has limitations on what he knows and/or how he can choose to intervene and/or is limited in his compassion and mercy beyond what even some humans are capable of producing. And all this mayhem is a result of the desires and weaknesses he chose to bestow on humanity and the rules and penalties he chose to put in place despite our obvious inability to follow them assiduously even when we try very hard to do so.
In your favor, you believe in universal reconciliation, but even there, you have to account for human suffering in the meantime. I can't imagine that you'd be okay with your loved ones being sentenced to torture on the rack simply because you believe that they will eventually be released, healed and sent on their way, never to be tortured again.
Of course I don't believe the legends in the first place. I don't hold a god who doesn't exist responsible for the human condition. I am simply arguing from your framework of understanding and belief to show how it is self-inconsistent. Either god loves and cares or he doesn't. If he condemns humanity for it being human, is willing to allow death into the picture for any reason then he is callously ignoring human pain and suffering and loss and grief, even inflicting it effectively by his own actions and policies.
I hope you don't mind but I thought this was going too far afield from the OP so I decided to answer your statements by starting a new thread on "The Problem of Evil."
"The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."
2 Peter 3:9
He has no desire for anyone to go to hell. But man in all his stupidity chooses that path. God just can't win with skeptics like you. IF He does nothing to wipe out evil and sin, you blame Him. If He doesn't allow sinners to exist without judgement, then you blame Him.
Would you say your parents didn't love you if you stubbornly refused their pleas not to walk off the edge of the cliff? Blaming God is like blaming the parents. They should have chained, tied up their kid to prevent his free will.
Let me tell you why this post is a fail....
Take you analogy above. "Would you say your parents didn't love you if you stubbornly refused their pleas not to walk off the edge of the cliff? Blaming God is like blaming the parents. They should have chained, tied up their kid to prevent his free will"
For this to match what God (according to the Bible) did, it would have to go something like this:
"Would you say your parents didn't love you if you stubbornly refused their pleas not to walk off the edge of the cliff, and then they caused you to die and tortured you for eternity?"
No Jeff, I would not say they loved me. If my parents were perfectly fine seeing me being tortured for eternity for disobeying them, then they most certainly do not love me. To think that your parents, or God, loves you, all the while watching you being tortured for eternity for a very small "crime", is mental.
He certainly does DESIRE that people burn in hell. In fact, it is his made up rules that sends people there, right? According to you, and your God, I would burn in hell for the simple fact that I don't kiss his feet. Yea, sounds like he loves his creation.... More like, he loves having people stroke his ego.
Sorry but you can't have it both ways. You can't tell me evolution is mindless and random yet tell me it select traits that have a better chance at survival. Then tell me it is subjective. You need some loose definitions to get out of explaining to me why humans would evolve with weaker traits like no thick pads on our bare feet.
Evolution doesn't have a mind of it's own. It's a process. The best of a species at surviving will survive. This, in theory, means the best traits, but it primarily comes down to the best combination. For whatever reason, humans as they are survive, most likely due to our superior intellect and ability to run in long duration (we may be slower than an antelope but we can run longer and farther).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Hey why did God design testicles at all? Why did He make our bodies dependent on blood? Why not make our bones out of indestructible metal or just make us like a thick solid jelly. You could spend all day doing these second guesses but the bottom line is unless you have the same supreme knowledge of God then it is arrogant to question his blue print. There is a purpose and reason for His design. There are countless functions of the human body that it does amazing well and shows intelligent design. And unlike every other freaking species on the planet, God made human beings to be unique physical creations. That's why we have hundreds of different facial features, lips, noses, eyes, brow, ears, hair color and shape, the list goes on and on.. But you will ignore those and focus on a few handful that appear as flaws on the surface.
Ignore those? I don't ignore them. I just draw a radically different conclusion because yours is a jumbled mess. Humans have facial features? Remarkable... So does every other species. It's a fairly well known fact that we're much better at noticing differences within our own species (and race, actually) than we are in other species. The race thing is key. There's a reason people often can't tell members of another race apart. Lack of exposure results in a less observant understanding. So, you can say I ignore that point that you claim proves intelligent design (you clearly have no concept of what proof is), but in fact, I just know why that 'fact' is the way it is.
But yeah, the theological cop out finally came up. You can't question this or it's arrogance. Great. That's intellectually worthless to everyone. What is the point of subservience? Is that what a loving God could ever want? I see why he's called a king though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Everything God makes is good. There are good bacteria that serves a purpose. Sin brought a curse onto this world which created things like bad bacteria and disease. If a child goes out and murders someone, do you blame the mother for having brought the child into this world? In a fallen world, we certainly are designed with the assumption that we will die. Our cells don't regenerate perfectly so we are all on a certain timeline cycle of birth and death. Exactly the same cycle seen all throughout nature even with the four seasons. There's your evidence of a perfect God. Everything works in perfect cycles in this world from the rising sun to the falling leaf.
Again, I really regret how much the American school system has failed you. What you presented is not evidence. Everything working in perfect unison (which 'perfect' is a very generous word for it) is proof only of how those things work. That's it. What about that proves God? And that's not rhetorical. I expect an answer to that. Ignore everything else if you wish, I desperately want an answer to just that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Adam and Eve were perfect before the fall, but sin is death and that put a curse on man. That curse made us mortal and susceptible to the many dangers in this world. That is just simply reality. Nothing good ever comes from sin. Look at all the people who indulge in sexual sin. There is almost always some consequence to their actions whether it is destroyed marriages, careers, stds, unwanted pregnancies etc....
Well, given how that story ends, Adam and Eve were clearly not perfect. They were stupid enough to listen to a talking snake, who's punishment was having to crawl on the ground, which open up a whole world of questions.
Regardless, do you know how many sins there are. One of them is mixing cloth? Is the consequence to that being torture eternally by my loving father? Or was that one of the ones that Jesus crossed out, but remember, sin is not subjective. Do you see why I have trouble taking that threat seriously?
Evolution doesn't have a mind of it's own. It's a process. The best of a species at surviving will survive.
But, the process of "evolution" doesn't exist out*there*somewhere on its own in isolation, but is a property/propensity of "life," i.e., of living things … which DO possess some degree of "mind" … even at the most basic level …
Some of the most basic defining properties of "living things" include "metabolism," (a degree of) "motility," "reproduction," and "interaction/response to stimuli" (i.e., "mind") …
"Life"-ness itself is all about "process" … It is open-ended and by design (don't necessarily read somethingnecessarily special into that term) a living organism is an "open system" which is itself influenced/shaped/designed by the processes of history ...
You creationists dont understand how natural phenomena can organize things.
Does anyone design the coastline? Coves, headlands, beaches. These are changed by a few variables. If you are on a beach and see a neat line of debris at the high tide mark, or intricate brqnching rivulets in the Sand...do you look adound for someone lining them up or do you realise this pattern results from natural phenomena.
Actaully some one does design the coastlines. I forget the name of the designer of the fjoirds of Norway but he was extremely proud of his work. I watched him being interviewed on the documentary Highhickers Guide to the Universe. It was a BBC series back in the 80s.
We can influence natural processes. Artificial selection is man being the dominant variable in evolution. Its still evolution...just influenced by human choice
Evolution doesn't have a mind of it's own. It's a process. The best of a species at surviving will survive. This, in theory, means the best traits, but it primarily comes down to the best combination. For whatever reason, humans as they are survive, most likely due to our superior intellect and ability to run in long duration (we may be slower than an antelope but we can run longer and farther).
The the best trait like having thick foot pads and superior strength should have survived and passed down the generations. Not go away. You have failed miserably to explain why human beings lost superior traits that our primates had.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Ignore those? I don't ignore them. I just draw a radically different conclusion because yours is a jumbled mess. Humans have facial features? Remarkable... So does every other species. It's a fairly well known fact that we're much better at noticing differences within our own species (and race, actually) than we are in other species. The race thing is key. There's a reason people often can't tell members of another race apart.
Baloney. You put ten human beings in a room even of the same race vs ten black labs and you're going to see distinct personalities and appearances in the ten humans. The black labs will all look and act the same way. When I go to select a dog breed, I pretty much know exactly what kind of dog personality I'm getting. There is no reason why evolution would create humans with features like different hair colors. Hmm don't see that with other primates. Guess it's that natural selection at work there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Lack of exposure results in a less observant understanding. So, you can say I ignore that point that you claim proves intelligent design (you clearly have no concept of what proof is), but in fact, I just know why that 'fact' is the way it is.
You clearly have no concept of evidence vs proof.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
But yeah, the theological cop out finally came up. You can't question this or it's arrogance. Great. That's intellectually worthless to everyone. What is the point of subservience? Is that what a loving God could ever want? I see why he's called a king though.
You can question it as long as you honestly leave open the door of accepting that you don't have all the facts to prove a point
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Again, I really regret how much the American school system has failed you.
And now the true colors come out. This comment was completely unecessary and meant as a slap in the face. You are just another atheist who has to resort to the belittling tactic to try to look like you have the upper hand. Sad really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
What you presented is not evidence. Everything working in perfect unison (which 'perfect' is a very generous word for it) is proof only of how those things work. That's it. What about that proves God? And that's not rhetorical. I expect an answer to that. Ignore everything else if you wish, I desperately want an answer to just that.
The evidence is in the alternative. Random forces do not produce order and alignment. They produce random results. The notion that if I just wait long enough, the cycles will all come together is easy to claim, impossible to prove.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Well, given how that story ends, Adam and Eve were clearly not perfect. They were stupid enough to listen to a talking snake, who's punishment was having to crawl on the ground, which open up a whole world of questions.
Sure they were. They were give perfect free will, the ability to listen and make choices based on their own reasoning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Regardless, do you know how many sins there are. One of them is mixing cloth? Is the consequence to that being torture eternally by my loving father? Or was that one of the ones that Jesus crossed out, but remember, sin is not subjective. Do you see why I have trouble taking that threat seriously?
Mixing cloth? If that's your argument then you know very little about the Bible and the Old Convent. Sin is sin because it is a heart based action. A person with an evil heart commits sin. A person with a heart not seeking God lives in disobedience. It is the essense of disobedience not the specific action like mixing cloth that is the crux of sin that God hates and judges.
You could try to adopt a black and white morality sin rulebook but that's not what God looks at. He looks at a person's heart and intentions. You might say stealing is always wrong. Well what if a Jewish POW breaks into the Nazi's office and steals food and his keys. Still always wrong? Same rule, different heart intentions.
I hope you don't mind but I thought this was going too far afield from the OP so I decided to answer your statements by starting a new thread on "The Problem of Evil."
Find people who live barefoot. They have adequate footpads for that. Most people's feet are modified by environmental factors...that is, wearing shoes.
Superior strength comes at a cost. So does big brains. If big brains were more useful than strength, investing your limited resources in growing your brain would be advantageous(brains require a ton of calories). Having both, in hard tines you could starve. In a more extreme example why don't cavefish have working eyes? If a designer made them...why give them relic eyes buried under the skin? So superiority of a trait cannot be judged by us...it is all based on evolutionary context.
On your note on the supposed diversity of humans vs the lack thereof in labs(which are selectively bred to be very similar)or primates, that is due to your humanocentric view of the world. For one thing, dogs are way more diverse than we are. Looking at genetics(a good quantitative/objective measure of difference) we are very similar. Man actually went through a severe genetic bottleneck at some point in our evolutionary past and have yet to recover the diversity.
(And no, the timing of this does not support flood geology or the Garden stories)
Last edited by bornincali; 12-02-2015 at 03:35 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
