Christians in denial

[MidGe]

First of all, let me say that, like Chez and bunny, I think the notion of a compassionate and loving god is a very beautiful one. Unfortunately it does not fit the facts. Rather than take the line about justice being an inalienable right of god when it comes to human punishing/rewarding human behaviour with eternal punishment or reward, I would rather change the argument against god by looking at animals. There are no doubts they they are subject to suffering too, with no promises of reward should they just shut up and toe the tyrant line. I find it amazing, that most christians are not questioning this manifestation of an omnipotent creator.

Your god is, to me, is anathema, it is the very manifestation of what you call evil or satanic. Why keep on the denial?


If you think that animal don't suffer, I have no answer to you, except that I accept it as a confirmation that you are a pathological case, like I feel that most believers are.

Perhaps you are not in denial but prefer living your life like a game of poker, as long as it is EV+.

[whiskeytown]

I'm sorry, what is your point again? -

What facts do you have about God? - Please share them, and if they're facts, you probably have documentation -

if you choose not to believe, fine - why should that matter to me or any Christian in the slightest? - We believe everyone will have to answer individually before God, as do most faiths - and you do what you want, and we'll do what we want up till then, within the (hopefully) constrains of society.

What is the point of dragging animals into this? Did they tell you some of the facts about God you're certain about?

What does what you think about God have to do with how I practice the teachings of Jesus? -

I don't even comphrend the point of this post - are you drunk or stoned? - I'm not getting this -

If you want to know how Jesus felt about animals, he informed us that not even a Sparrow falls to the ground without the knowledge of the father - and that the lilies of the field were more beautifully clothed then Solomon in all his glory - but what is your point?

The creation account, whether literal or figurative, also informs us that man/woman was created in a different image then the animals - in God's image, so to speak - I would argue they have souls whereas perhaps animals don't have that capacity - but then again, it may be more that creation has no need for one -

But you believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want - your argument, and "facts", which, let's face it, is merely another opinion - yours and mine, will have no bearing on my faith.

why should I give up my faith because you have none? - And what on earth makes you think this incomphrensible post of yours can ever rival what I have recieved from my faith in Jesus -

and how can you say with certainity that my life is worse with faith then it would be without - I won't compare it to yours, but I can compare it to mine without faith - suicidal and drunk trying to fill a hole that everyone has, but can't recognize but they'll drink, screw, and kill to try to fill it.

it's just opinion vs opinion, and your belief system vs. mine, but just because you have no faith doesn't mean I have to give up mine -

Screw that /images/graemlins/grin.gif

rb

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, what is your point again? -

What facts do you have about God? - Please share them, and if they're facts, you probably have documentation -

if you choose not to believe, fine - why should that matter to me in the slightest? -

What is the point of dragging animals into this? Did they tell you some of the facts about God you're certain about?

What does what you think about God have to do with how I practice the teachings of Jesus? -

I don't even comphrend the point of this post - are you drunk or stoned? - I'm not getting this -

Jesus informed us that not even a Sparrow falls to the ground without the knowledge of the father - so what is your point?

The creation account, whether literal or figurative, also informs us that man/woman was created in a different image then the animals - in God's image, so to speak - I would argue they have souls whereas perhaps animals don't have that capacity - but then again, it may be more that creation has no need for one -

But you believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want - your argument, and facts, which, let's face it, is merely another opinion - yours and mine -

why should I give up my faith because you have none? - And what on earth makes you think this incomphrensible post of yours can ever rival what I have recieved from my faith in Jesus -

and how can you say with certainity that my life is worse with faith then it would be without -

it's just opinion vs opinion, and your belief system vs. mine, but just because you have no faith doesn't mean I have to give up mine -

Screw that /images/graemlins/grin.gif

rb

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty sure you are both drunk /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
Pretty sure you are both drunk /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

18 months sober as of the 7th - not even smoking right now either -

probably why my politics posts are better again - LOL

RB

[Lestat]

I think this post lends an air of being perhaps a little too blunt and therefore insulting, but otherwise, it's one of the best points to be made.

A quick and honest glance around the animal kingdome reveals nature in all its beautiful glory and downright cruelty. Of course, believers in a loving God will tell you that animals were only put on earth to serve man, but you're right... This is one of the clearest cases of denial to be shown. Those with enough sense to believe in evolution almost HAVE to realize this or at the very least question it rigorously. Alas, they do not. Too scary and unpleasant of a proposition I suppose.

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this post lends an air of being perhaps a little too blunt and therefore insulting, but otherwise, it's one of the best points to be made.

A quick and honest glance around the animal kingdome reveals nature in all its beautiful glory and downright cruelty. Of course, believers in a loving God will tell you that animals were only put on earth to serve man, but you're right... This is one of the clearest cases of denial to be shown. Those with enough sense to believe in evolution almost HAVE to realize this or at the very least question it rigorously. Alas, they do not. Too scary and unpleasant of a proposition I suppose.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know it's late on a Friday, so it's cool and all...but surely you're drunk, too...I see some uncharacteristic spelling and grammar errors in here....

[MidGe]

whiskeytown,

I am just saying that there is an incompatibility between a "loving" god and what I see and experience in the world.

No, I am not drunk, although it does seem a better state of being than having to accept the real as I experience it. Maybe it is simply a matter of perception (and empathy).

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]

A quick and honest glance around the animal kingdome reveals nature in all its beautiful glory and downright cruelty.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would argue there is no cruelty in the animal world that matches the cruelty of man.

Sure, animals kill for food, for territory - I remember seeing footage of 20 hornets slaughtering a few thousand honeybees a while back -

is it natural for an animal to kill another because of sexual orientation? - because of birth heritage? - do they kill for meaningless green pieces of paper?

all the supposed cruelty of nature that you claim to see is usually only from men, not from the animal kingdom - sure, animals kill for food, for territory, for fear and self defense, and in that regard the cycle of life goes on irregardless - but can you give me an example where any other animal besides man hunted another species to extinction - can you think of another species that used germ warfare to decimate a species? - that's not a typical defense system, using 3rd party germ warfare - (thinking of smallpox passed onto the Indians thru infected blankets here)

Is there a case in the animal kingdom where one species tried to kill all those of of the same species but a different lineage because of a supposed crime against it's descendants committed over 2000 years ago?

but the soul of man, or the absence of it, is capable of a cruelty unheard of in nature, which would reinforce the Bible's suggestion of man as being inheritantly sinful.

I cannot think of another species apart from man that has committed as much destruction for personal gain/hatred then man - so I don't exactly perceive cruelty in the same way in the animal kingdom like I saw it in Rwanda, Nazi Germany, and a thousand other affairs of men.

rb

[Lestat]

There are no facts about God, but the point of the post is all the FACTS about nature that are right in front of your nose, yet you refuse to see.

It is not his belief system vs. your belief system. It is FACTS vs. your belief system. Unfortunately, your belief system has no facts.

Animals are a perfect point to bring up. That you can see no relevant point is proof of your denial.

[Lestat]

I did split a couple bottles of wine tonight. I'd look over my post for the errors, but it's lights out for me now.

[bkholdem]

What's wrong with suffering?

[chezlaw]

Hi Midge, its sure a problem for some christians but not a general problem for god as the animal argument changes nothing about the problem of evil. It could still be the case that everything that appears to suffers either doesn't actually suffer, or approves of the suffering (possibly retrospectively).

I don't believe this is true but logically its unassailable.

chez

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
I would argue there is no cruelty in the animal world that matches the cruelty of man.

Sure, animals kill for food, for territory - I remember seeing footage of 20 hornets slaughtering a few thousand honeybees a while back -

is it natural for an animal to kill another because of sexual orientation? - because of birth heritage? - do they kill for meaningless green pieces of paper?

all the supposed cruelty of nature that you claim to see is usually only from men, not from the animal kingdom - sure, animals kill for food, for territory, for fear and self defense, and in that regard the cycle of life goes on irregardless - but can you give me an example where any other animal besides man hunted another species to extinction - can you think of another species that used germ warfare to decimate a species? - that's not a typical defense system, using 3rd party germ warfare - (thinking of smallpox passed onto the Indians thru infected blankets here)

Is there a case in the animal kingdom where one species tried to kill all those of of the same species but a different lineage because of a supposed crime against it's descendants committed over 2000 years ago?

but the soul of man, or the absence of it, is capable of a cruelty unheard of in nature, which would reinforce the Bible's suggestion of man as being inheritantly sinful.

I cannot think of another species apart from man that has committed as much destruction for personal gain/hatred then man - so I don't exactly perceive cruelty in the same way in the animal kingdom like I saw it in Rwanda, Nazi Germany, and a thousand other affairs of men.


[/ QUOTE ]

[Ben K]

True - man is awesome at cruelty. I'm not sure how, just because animals are relatively poor at it, it means their suffering is any way diminshed.

Animals will often kill a deformed offspring (say albino) - analagous to muder due to sexual orientation. Animals will kill due to birth hertiage, there's a type of seal where the dominant male kills the pups of other males. Animals would kill for green pieces of paper if they had such a system. Given that they kill over food and territory how can you not see this? Green pieces of paper represent access to food and enough of them, territory.

I'm not sure I see your point about germ warfare and the rest. Humans kill for the same reasons as animals - we are animals! Smallpox passed onto Indians thru blankets - I have absolutely no knowledge of the story - but do you conceed that it may (as I said I don't know!) have been done for natural animal reasons like territory and control?

Yeah I doubt animals have 2000 year grudges - in some respects they are far smarter than humans. If we had no religion I doubt we'd be going through 2000 year grudges either. Think about it.

The thing is humans have been massively destructive but most of that is we do so because we can. When you look at why we do it then you come back to fundamental animal stuff or a malfunctioning of someone.

As soon as you look at why, you see that we're the same as the animals so the contradiction of a loving god and suffering in nature holds.

God exists as a combination of our natural tendencies to assign personalities to things (like numbers see thread in El Diablos forum) and as an explanation of the world around us. We now have better explanations and understand that thunder doesn't have a personality so the god explanation is no longer required. god doesn't exist as a provable entity. If he/she/it (and you guys can't even agree on this!) did then I'm sure you'd have proved it by now.