View Single Post
  #53  
Old 06-07-2006, 04:30 PM
madnak madnak is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn (Red Hook)
Posts: 5,271
Default Re: religion and faith (also long)

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I recommend you reread! All the prophets and apostles spent their lives trying to get the message across, under God's direction. Countless times God sends the message: "all you need to do is trust me". Then he sends Jesus, and plenty of miracles later, folk still won't accept the message. I can understand why the death of Jesus is unpursuasive (Paul agrees with you!) - it is the resurrection of Jesus that is pursuasive. It is the ultimate demonstration that all you need to do is trust God.

[/ QUOTE ]

My trust is earned, not given freely. If Satan said "just trust me," would you do it?

[ QUOTE ]
I think the question is: what evidence would you accept?

[/ QUOTE ]

A miracle would be a start. I would put a great deal of effort into finding God if I experienced a personal vision or miracle. To be fair, I'd say meet me halfway, but at least throw me a bone. And no, human beings preaching on the subject don't qualify in my opinion. Particularly not if they can't distinguish themselves in some qualitative way from those of other religions.

[ QUOTE ]
We are not omniscient, so we can expect some of the things God does to look strange (he sees outcomes we don't). Consequently, we need to be able to trust him. That is the bottom line. Miracles are helpful for some, but many would put their hand in Jesus side and still not trust him. God clearly understands the difficulties of those who have limited evidence of his faithfulness (John 20:29), but at the same time, today we have unprecendented levels of access to the testimony of those who have personally experienced God. So it is hard to make excueses.

[/ QUOTE ]

We have unprecedented levels of access to the testimony of those who have personally experienced the Gods of other faiths as well. But a Buddhist, who lives his life according to compassion and faith, goes to hell because he doesn't accept Jesus as his Lord and Saviour?

Again, it wouldn't make sense for me to trust a God who contradicts Himself. Even if He didn't, asking me to trust Him arbitrarily is asking quite a lot. But given the horrible things He's done, and the contradictory claims He's made, and the fact that He hasn't given me the personal experiences, I think trusting Him would be a perfect example of blindness, not faith.

[ QUOTE ]
I think have no shortage of self-respect. The question is, how much respect for others do you have? And how much for God? If you come first every time, I think it's clear where the problem lies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Plenty for others. None for God. Like my trust, my respect is earned and not given freely. I have some respect for every human being, because my experience has given me "faith" in the human spirit and in the potential for courage and nobility in every person on this planet. I also know the struggles through which humans persevere, and it's almost impossible not to respect them knowing that. God has given me no such indicators, in fact he seems cruel and petty. In my experience, most human cruelty stems from weakness and insecurity and ignorance and fear - which mitigates it and makes it understandable. God is immune to such things, and so must be judged much more harshly.

[ QUOTE ]
At the risk of sounding trite, I could say there is no good outcome from smoking, either, except that you serve as a warning to others.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if that's true, but if it is, smoking is a mistake. God doesn't make mistakes, does He?

[ QUOTE ]
What I can say is that I understand that there are such things as competing goods, and that being omnipotent does not obviously take that away. You may want everyone to be both free and safe, for example, but I don't know how you'd do it (assuming they are real people and you leave them choices).

[/ QUOTE ]

Cruel and unusual punishment wouldn't be a good place to start IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
Well, there are some christians who feel that they aren't and that he decided long ago who would choose wisely and who foolishly. Personally I think that is a misreading - God has certainly known forever who would choose foolishly, but the bible is clear that God gives us a choice for which we are responsible. You can claim that there are many (all?) whose choice is constrained by their experience, but the point is that God knows your experience, and your response to it. And he does the judging, not us.

[/ QUOTE ]

So He created me, knowing that I would go to hell? And yet He has no accountability in the matter? Couldn't He have created me differently, or not at all?

[ QUOTE ]
In my humble opinion, the axe murderer has as much of God's sympathy as I do, probably more (read the parable of the lost sheep again!).

[/ QUOTE ]

He may have more of God's sympathy, but you're the one going to heaven. What happened to justice?

[ QUOTE ]
These are fine points, and well made, but they are made from a position of (unavoidable) ignorance. We simply do not know what the constraints of eternity are. It may be that hellfire is just a poetic way of describing an eternity of selfishness and isolation, or it may be that hell is just a boogie man to motivate the weak and that God would never actually do it, or it may be that it is eternal agony, made inevitable by direct exposure to God (think of the Total Perspective Vortex in the Hitchhikers Guide), or any number of other alternatives. It would be nice if God had explained why there is undesired punishment for the wicked, but I think his main audience at the time were shocked that the punishment should be undesired, and were repulsed by the notion that God actually wants to save everybody! Plenty of people today have trouble with a God who lets in a repentant <insert victimised minority here>.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the Word of God is just propaganda? Words meant, not to express truth, but only to manipulate us? Ironically, that's eminently preferable to me and may even be justifiable, however it throws everything in the Bible into question. What did God say because it's the immutable Truth, and what did He say simply to influence human action? Under such circumstances, it seems my poor atheist heart is a better moral compass than God.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, actually, on several occasions! As I said, I am no OT scholar, but I think you could argue that God was far harder on the Israelites than anyone else around.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the Sodomites had it worse. Regardless, I don't see how this is meant to improve my image of God.

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't you wish baby Hitler had been smitten? He sees the outcomes. We don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I wouldn't. I thought Hitler was free to make his choices?

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure I'm wrong about the justification - I was just trying to point out that you and I cannot tell what is justified and what is not, because we, unlike him, are not omni3.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you want me to believe that He's omni3. How is it unreasonable to demand an answering for such crimes before I accept someone as "omnibenevolent?" In fact, how can I reasonably believe God is omnibenevolent in any case given His actions? The reasonable conclusion here seems to be that God is not omni3.

[ QUOTE ]
Because he loves us. The bloke giving you a compulsory vaccination looks like a tyrant, but isn't. The dentist with a drill looks like a tyrant too. Every time we don't understand why we have to suffer, we are ready to blame someone, usually the perpetrator. There is such a thing as tough love, and it is much better than the squishy girly kind you see on TV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I always liked going to the dentist. Call me crazy. But I don't recall the dentist torturing to death the kids who didn't. Hell, if memory serves, my dentist's response to fear and anger toward him was candy. He was a nice guy, he gave candy to kids after they went to see him. Even if they hated him. And never eternal torment. Maybe he was an evil dude; candy rots the teeth, after all. Better hell than that.
Reply With Quote