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.
I'm not the one that started a thread claiming to be able to judge God. I'm only asking those that side with the OP how they can come to the position they hold.
You're right. The only answer you and the rest have is that you simply don't like it. Your opinion is that it's bad, so that's that. That's a lame response and holds no authority.
12-05-2013, 01:26 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn
It's obvious he's not going to.
He's got a track record of ducking, weaving and side stepping that would make a junior lightweight in the ring with Ali jealous.
Whatever problem we have, and I don't think we do, he has the burden to show how he knows God is good and by what standard is he, as a subjective creature, able to discern a metaphysical beings moral sentiments as being good let alone demonstrate that this being even exists - he does not know it but his burden is massively greater than can be met.
12-05-2013, 01:30 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
You're right. The only answer you and the rest have is that you simply don't like it. Your opinion is that it's bad, so that's that. That's a lame response and holds no authority.
This is completely dishonest - that you would take our thoughtful and oft detailed responses and reduce them to this level of examination. I think you frankly are in over your intellectual head. Your are being obstinate, repetitive, dishonest, and frankly unable to discern the massive burden and logical fallacy that you have fallen into.
Vizio we seem to have entered into the realms of the surreal, the absurd and frankly quite disturbed.
In comparing two systems, the first one based on empathy where you consider the feelings of your fellow human beings before acting and base your judgements on whether you would like or dislike the same treatment, and a second system where you can commit the most heinous and horrific crimes imaginable, act in any way you please and get rewarded just because you asked for forgiveness afterwards.
And then you in all honesty ask me the question:
"How do you know your system is best?"
It's obvious which system is best.
If you honestly can't tell which of these systems is best then I don't know what else to say.
12-05-2013, 01:34 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne
Vizio we seem to have entered into the realms of the surreal, the absurd and frankly quite disturbed.
In comparing two systems, the first one based on empathy where you consider the feelings of your fellow human beings before acting and base your judgements on whether you would like or dislike the same treatment, and a second system where you can commit the most heinous and horrific crimes imaginable, act in any way you please and get rewarded just because you asked for forgiveness afterwards.
And then you in all honesty ask me the question:
"How do you know your system is best?"
It's obvious which system is best.
If you honestly can't tell which of these systems is best then I don't know what else to say.
This is the point in the thread where I realize you guys have no common sense and logic. To suggest a creator has no dominion over his creation is lunacy. It's pointless to even attempt to argue with this sort of "logic".
A creator would be definition have dominion over its creation. But that isn't the point he was making. The point was that being a creator does not confer "legitimacy".
To borrow from a favorite theist example: Stalin had hegemony over his people but that didn't mean that how he used that power was ethical or moral.
You're right. The only answer you and the rest have is that you simply don't like it. Your opinion is that it's bad, so that's that. That's a lame response and holds no authority.
What a colossal crock....Who did this to you? I've heard of cult programming, but I've never seen a case so severe as yours....Your questions have been answered multiple times by several different members, and not one of them said "because I don't like it"... Your dishonesty is insulting....
12-05-2013, 01:38 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
A creator would be definition have dominion over its creation. But that isn't the point he was making. The point was that being a creator does not confer "legitimacy".
To borrow from a favorite theist example: Stalin had hegemony over his people but that didn't mean that how he used that power was ethical or moral.
I pretty much told him the same but he responded that God gets to say what is right or wrong because he is the creator - that's a sad bases for morality.
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.
Whatever problem we have, and I don't think we do, he has the burden to show how he knows God is good and by what standard is he, as a subjective creature, able to discern a metaphysical beings moral sentiments as being good let alone demonstrate that this being even exists - he does not know it but his burden is massively greater than can be met.
Your are being obstinate, repetitive, dishonest, and frankly unable to discern the massive burden and logical fallacy that you have fallen into.
