Proofs that God is imaginary

[Ziggy Stardust]

Again, christians would answer that Satan brought pain and suffering into the world. Since he himself is a being of free will, the same logic as above applies.

But really, you're asking the wrong man here. I'm just throwing out a hypothesis that would bind together some of the more glaring holes in christianity. I've been very clear that I just don't know. I'd like to believe, but I find the basis (2000+ year old books) a bit too weak. Eridicus has nothing to do with it, though.

That's fine. I'm not expecting you to know everything. Just throwing out some questions.

"A fool can ask more questions than a thousand wise men can answer"

Does that mean that 'I don't know' isn't an answer?

 

[flyingchicken]

A teacher once told us in class: "A fool can ask more questions than a thousand wise men can answer"
I asked my teacher: "Does that mean that 'I don't know' isn't an answer?"

Isn't that called "equivocation?"

 

[eastsidebagel]

I don't think you've read much of my posts in this thread.

Believe me, I do always my best in trying to understand other people's posts. Do you mind to tell me then what did I obviously miss from your argumentation?

1. Maybe in the long term all those terrible things are actually minor? (considering I'm going to live forever)
2. "My ways are your not your ways. My thoughts are not your thoughts." So the old adage...God works in mysterious ways.

Try harder, Mowque...if God would be real, he could be easily compared to a malicious kid who just loves to burn ants with a giant magnifying glass for the fun of it!

 

[Mowque]

Try harder, Mowque...if God would be real, he could be easily compared to a malicious kid who just loves to burn ants with a giant magnifying glass for the fun of it!

Of course you could compare God to that. Is that supposed to be a shocker? But why would he send a guy like Jesus then?

 

[eastsidebagel]

Of course you could compare God to that. Is that supposed to be a shocker? But why would he send a guy like Jesus then?

My question then is...:Why is such a cruel and unjust deity worthy of mass worship and obedience then, when he clearly proves himself to be absolutely not better or any more moral than any other human being?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Isn't that called "equivocation?"

Only if you feel the need to label it.

 

[Camikaze]

My question then is...:Why is such a cruel and unjust deity worthy of mass worship and obedience then, when he clearly proves himself to be absolutely not better or any more moral than any other human being?

Because He (or She, to be PC) has great powers, and you need to suck up to Him/Her? Or alternatively, He/She is worthy of our gratitude due to the wonderful creation around us? I think.

 

[eastsidebagel]

"A fool can ask more questions than a thousand wise men can answer"

A so-called wise man who is just too lazy/unmotivated to answer all the questions people ask him about the subject he is allegedly so lucid about, shouldn't be treated with any respect whatsoever.

 

[flyingchicken]

A so-called wise man who is just too lazy/unmotivated to answer all the questions people ask him about the subject he is allegedly so lucid about, shouldn't be treated with any respect whatsoever.

"1 + 1 = 2"
"Really? Why?"
"Erm..."

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

What colour is Thursday?

 

[Xyan]

Consider this, for a philosophical exercise:

• God is omnipotent and omniscient
• God is good
• God created beings with free will
• God wanted these beings to do good, but ultimately they make their own choices
• Think of Jesus as God's plan B, in case creation didn't take the path he wanted it to

Would you not love a God who created you so you really could make your own choices? Let's imagine that God at every junction in your life knew all the possible outcomes of your decisions. All will be well in the end, but God's plan is a network of possibilities and we get to influence the end result.

Unlike others, including Epicurus, I'm not pretending I know all the answers. But the above is certainly something a thinking person could base beliefs upon, without comprimising too much with the Bible.

For a disclaimer, look back a few posts in my profile. I'm not on a mission here, but I've spent a lot of time considering these issues.

If (no sins == happier) & (no free will == no sins),
Then (no free will == happier)
God -> gives free will
God -> expects sins
God -> does not want us to be happy
God -> Evil.

Seriously, I think free will only make sense in the absence of the concept of a creator.

 

[El_Machinae]

The God you don't believe in is a puppeteer. I claim God doesn't heal cancer because we should do it ourselves.
The God I'd like to believe in (but am failing most the time) is a God who is relying on people to do good, because with free will comes a promise he won't meddle too much.

Yeah, a noninterfering god is a robust idea, because it can't be disproven. The Biblical god, though, frequently performs miracles through his own actions or through a proxy. In fact, Jesus (who's sometimes assumed to speak for the whole godhead) extols his followers to use faith to cure diseases. So, while there's the idea that the diseases should be cured, we're living in a world where biological science has cured millions more lepers than faith can lay a claim to. And, keep in mind, that there are millions of people of people suffering until those cures are developed, even though the Bible claims God could do it.

Come on, blaming evil on religion is not a very constructive way to move forward, considering the huge masses of people who believe in a god of some sorts.

I'm not saying religion is evil or should be blamed for evil. Now, I'm one of the first people to rank religions according to some metric of 'evilness', but that's not the same thing. It's religion itself which defines the source of evil, but to use that definition, you have to use the religion's mythology.

And if you're saying you believe there's a god out there, but he's evil, I can't help thinking we'd be even worse off than we are...

Well, the idea of a creator god being evil (or nongood) is also robust. The Problem of Evil completely disappears if you don't think god is good.

 

[Capt Buttkick]

If (no sins == happier) & (no free will == no sins),
Then (no free will == happier)
God -> gives free will
God -> expects sins
God -> does not want us to be happy
God -> Evil.

Seriously, I think free will only make sense in the absence of the concept of a creator.

I'll take the word "seriously" to indicate a
Otherwise it's pretty easy to refute logically.

 

[Xyan]

I'll take the word "seriously" to indicate a
Otherwise it's pretty easy to refute logically.

Writing in pseudo-pseudo-code does indicated a somewhat light-hearted approach.. just feeling "trigger-happy" with posts..

 

[Capt Buttkick]

The God you believe in must a hypocritical, sadistic evil-doer then! He creates cancer, millions of people suffer and die from it, and yet, he still relies on our own intellect to cure it! Why did he create this horrendous decease in the first place? And what about Aids, Ebola, the Pest etc.? And why does it seem to me that we are all just his mindless marionettes in his big, pointless game of chess when this God is really existent at all?

I'll repeat myself then.
I'm not claiming God created evil. The common christian belief is that evil entered the world through Satan, let in by man.

I don't claim God is a puppeteer. Quite contrary, I'm arguing that God created beings with true free will. In this context, the reason why God is obscured from view, is that he's not forcing anyone into believing. This also explains why God can't cure cancer in one go, why won't God heal amputees and so on.

If he did, he would force belief upon us, thus taking away his highest gift, free will.

If the christian god is the one true god, and I'm not let into heaven because of my lack of faith, I can't really blame him. My bad, entirely.
Edit:, please read this literally. I'm not trying to generalise here. It's just how I feel.

For a disclaimer on my personal believes, I urge you to look up some of my earlier posts.

 

[Xyan]

Back on topic on the point about being imaginary.

We see a horse. And then we see another horse. Both very different horses. But we know they are the both horses. So we create a mental picture in our minds of a "perfect" horse. When we see any horse, we subconsciously match it with this "super-horse". If it matches to a good degree, we get a horse. Else it might be a donkey.

So we see good men. All different. And then we imagine a "Superman". To see if a new stranger is a good man or not, we compare it with our mental image of this "Superman". If it matches to a good degree, it is a good man. Else it might be a monkey and should only be a slave.

And as we all know humans are master exaggerators.

When we explain the idea of superman to our children, they become super-superman. And then super-super-superman. And many generations later, superman becomes God.

We say "Man is created in the image of God." But maybe "God is imagined from a couple of good men befriended by an innocent caveman."

 

[El_Machinae]

I thought repentance and love was what God wanted, not belief? Given that there are many in the Bible who rebelled against God despite believing in him, and who obviously had to believe in him (Satan & Adam, to name obvious ones), the idea that 'belief without evidence' is part of the plan seems counter-intuitive. It's clearly not needed for Free Will, as per the mythology. Heck, doubting Thomas was specifically given evidence.

Given that, it does seem somewhat petty to allow cancer to run rampant because of lack of belief. I'd still give medicine to a creationist who didn't believe in evolutionary theory, even though it was essential to developing the medicine.

 

[Capt Buttkick]

I thought repentance and love was what God wanted, not belief? Given that there are many in the Bible who rebelled against God despite believing in him, and who obviously had to believe in him (Satan & Adam, to name obvious ones), the idea that 'belief without evidence' is part of the plan seems counter-intuitive. It's clearly not needed for Free Will, as per the mythology. Heck, doubting Thomas was specifically given evidence.

Subsistute 'believe' with 'follow' in my last post? I think it's more of a semantic argument anyway.

Given that, it does seem somewhat petty to allow cancer to run rampant because of lack of belief. I'd still give medicine to a creationist who didn't believe in evolutionary theory, even though it was essential to developing the medicine.

Can there be a greater gift than that of free will? Would you really prefer if God showed himself in the sky and you had to believe in him?

Besides, I'm open to the thought that God is dynamic. So, he tried the whole meddling and interfering business with the jews. And still they went their wicked ways. So he's trying a different approach now.

Like I said, I'm a heretic. I really don't hope too many believers read this

 

[Xyan]

Subsistute 'believe' with 'follow' in my last post? I think it's more of a semantic argument anyway.



Can there be a greater gift than that of free will? Would you really prefer if God showed himself in the sky and you had to believe in him?

Besides, I'm open to the thought that God is dynamic. So, he tried the whole meddling and interfering business with the jews. And still they went their wicked ways. So he's trying a different approach now.

Like I said, I'm a heretic. I really don't hope too many believers read this

Actually... if God is real and shows up, then yes. I would much prefer to believe him. Force me please. It is really for my own good. The only reason free will (with respect to the freedom to believe or not) is a good thing is only because of the possibility that God is false. Then it means I have a choice.

Who will choose not to believe if God showed up? But since he never showed up (meddling with certain chosen ones don't count), then the idea of free will is used to help believers rationalise among themselves why there are non-believers.

The freedom to ignore and disbelief in the face of overwhelming evidence is not freedom. It's silliness. Someone with a gun (with bullets) in my face telling me to smile, I will willingly flash my teeth. I don't want the pseudo-freedom to disobey and have my face punctured. But with no guns or any weapons, then it makes sense for me to decide freely if I wanted to smile at a stranger.

 

[PigsCorporation]

I thought that by now with so much on the internet, in books, and general spread of knowledge, that people would be intelligent and mature enough to agree that God is what you make him/it/whatever to be. God is the universe, so nuff said. Every religion is slightly different, yet they butt heads, argue, spew and sometimes even get medieval on each other trying to force their beliefs on others.

Let God be what everyone wants it to be. Now is time to move on to more interesting topics.