• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Blaming the innocent...

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Nice play on words. Never ABOUT ATHEISM..."70 odd years of the Communist party domination of Russia that the party did destroy churches, did kill clergymen, did flood the schools with atheist doctrines, etc."

BUT

It isn't ABOUT ATHEISM. Hmmmmmm... "That is illogical, Captain Evagelicalhumanist".

"You may also have noticed that the vast majority of Russians retained their beliefs anyway," Yes, there is always a Shadrach, Mesach and Abendego no matter what atheists try to shove down there throats. (Equal opportunity believer) There is always an atheist not matter what theists try to shove down their throats.

It is the definition of self-determination and free will that God gave mankind.
Then by your same reasoning, because I can read history, I have to state that the United States of America was ABOUT the eradication of indigenous peoples. The systematic reduction in their lands, their livelihoods, their freedoms and rights are a consistent story in your nation, and therefore that's what your nation must be about. The fact that some survived (to still be a thorn in the rest of your sides) is no different at all than the fact that Christians survived the depredations of the Communist party.

Do you see how ridiculous that is? Because it is ridiculous. Just as your claim that Communism was ABOUT atheism. It was not. It was a political and economic theory, one miniscule bit of which happened to conclude that atheism probably made more sense. But atheism was by absolutely no means WHAT COMMUNISM WAS ABOUT.

In fact, after 1941, suppression of religion was greatly relaxed, for Christians, Muslims, Jews and others (all of which existed in the Soviet Union). To gather support from the masses during World War II, the Stalin government re-opened thousands of temples and extinguished the league of militant atheists. Atheist propaganda returned to a lesser extent during the Khruschev government, and continued in a less strict way during the Breszhnev years.
 
Last edited:

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
I am really saddened at the downward spiral your posts are becoming. You have been schooled in the Bible and for you to omit or twist things is not the Evangelicalhumanist that used to be.
You're wrong. I've not changed...I'm who I always was.
Questions:

1) The above suggests that case one is the same as case two. So, if killing Canaanites through the use of Israel is wrong, you are then saying that God should do nothing with child sacrifices and beastiality (which produces rampant contagious diseases that would affect all ages. So you are fine with that?
You keep bringing that up, so I'll ask you a question: was every Canaanite killing children and buggering animals? All of them? Have you got any evidence of any sort whatsoever to demonstrate that this excessively unlikely scenario is the actual truth of a whole people?

Or perhaps you just have a few hints written by the victors, who, of course, never, ever distort the stories of those they defeated in order to look more justified themselves...oh my goodness, never! :rolleyes:
2) If God "could have PREVENTED all that useless killing" way before, you are saying two things, 1) that by removing Canaanites He wasn't stopping it, which is what He was doing as you suggested that He should. or 2) He should have stopped it before... How would you suggest He stop it without violating self-determination that He gave to man?
3) You are smart enough to know that God gave mankind self determination. So, but the use of the word "Omniscience" in your context, you are suggesting that mankind does NOT have self-determination because He could have stopped it. And could have stopped murder; could have stopped car accidents; could have stopped bullying; could have stopped broken bones; which eventually leaves one at the place of simply being a robot with no self-determination. Are you suggesting that God DIDN'T give man self-determination?
4) "(And philosophically, that's the problem with assuming "omni" anything, since it will inevitably run into a logical morass from which there's no escape.)" Really? So, "omni-potent" means that He is powerful enough to do ANYTHING! But He isn't powerful enough to give man self-determination and that if He gave man a lease on this world (to create anything they want for good or for bad) you have now a philosophical problem. You are in essence saying If He CAN'T give man self-determination and a lease in this world, then He is not OMNI-potent. Or if He DOES give man self-determination then He is NOT omnipotent because now man has power beyond His.

OR, as it is obvious to me and much more logical,

BECAUSE He is OMNI-POTENT, He has every capacity to give man self-determination and still not loose His capacity because He still is OMNI-POTENT.

The Biblical realty is that God is STILL trying to prevent people from doing evil by a new birth where man is reunited with the God of Love. Love God and Love your neighbor. But, we still have self-determination and can just decide there is no gods or God. Which, in its logical conclusion, means that man will determine the future of this world and the future of their individual lives making himself his own god and therefore there is no atheists because we become our own gods. A conundrum in and of itself.
You can try as many arguments as you like, but they all fail, because, as I'm about to demonstrate, your arguments always result in an absurdity, and there's no way out of it.

I do not care which "omni" word you use -- omnipotent, omniscient -- the philosophical and logical problems are inescapable.

Let's try a little thought experiment. Let's pretend that you wish to build a structure in your front yard which is against the local zoning codes. But, hey, you have self-determination, so you can ignore those codes, right? However, you're also smart enough to know what those codes are, and what the consequences of ignoring them will be -- you will be forced to tear down your new structure at your own expense, after having built it at your own expense. You'll lose a lot of money and time, needlessly, and probably annoy your neighbours into the bargain.

YOU KNOW ALL THIS BEFORE YOU START. So, do you start building?

The problem for an omniscient and omnipotent deity is much, much worse, because that deity must be aware that the very things he has brought (or is allowing) into creation will have to be destroyed by his own "law" and in contravention of his own "law."

This is why I say that an omniscient and omnipotent deity is a logical farce -- and it is made a trillion times worse when some religions, like Christianity, also insist that it is "loving," or (let's use the omni thing again), omnibenevolent. That sort of entity, knowing omnisciently beforehand how utterly useless his use of his omnipotence would be, would give himself an omnibenevolent hug, forget the entire thing, and go back to sleep.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Well, if that is true? Then "artist" who "created" the planet earth?

Was a rat-b*stard, a righteous beast, a monster by all accounts.
God gave Man dominion

and some guidelines were scripted....

as for the everyday fails of the flesh.....
we were never intended to live forever in this form

the chemistry is designed to fail

rat ******* …..say you?

well.....good luck with that when you stand before God and heaven
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
God gave Man dominion.

Nope. Not even a little. Looking around the planet? Back when the lie "god gave man dominion" was told? Humans were not the dominant animal.

and some guidelines were scripted....

as for the everyday fails of the flesh.....
we were never intended to live forever in this form

the chemistry is designed to fail

rat ******* …..say you?.

Indeed-- that is being too kind, really.
well.....good luck with that when you stand before God and heaven

LMAO! You think if I worried about your fake god and your fake infinite torture-pit, that I'd still be an atheist?

IF YOUR GOD IS REAL? IT HAS MUCH TO APOLOGIZE FOR.

If by some ridiculous twist of unreality? I meet this god? If it begs for forgiveness... I'll consider listening.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
hen by your same reasoning, because I can read history, I have to state that the United States of America was ABOUT the eradication of indigenous peoples. The systematic reduction in their lands, their livelihoods, their freedoms and rights are a consistent story in your nation, and therefore that's what your nation must be about. The fact that some survived (to still be a thorn in the rest of your sides) is no different at all than the fact that Christians survived the depredations of the Communist party.

You are too funny. An you already know the cross changed things in some cases, eradicated things in some cases, left things in some cases and began new things in other cases.

To use "a thorn in the rest of your sides" is to willfully ignore the above statement which you already know. The thorns was on the head of Jesus and removes the curse, eradicates it even as it has done for you!

As far as the historical fact of America? It remains historical! And, YES, some people DID do it to eradicate indigenous people, systematic reduction of their lands--on purpose, etc JUST AS ATHESTIC LENIN/STALIN/MAO did what they did in the name of their atheistic belief that they are their own gods.

Do you see how ridiculous that is? Because it is ridiculous. Just as your claim that Communism was ABOUT atheism. It was not. It was a political and economic theory, one miniscule bit of which happened to conclude that atheism probably made more sense. But atheism was by absolutely no means WHAT COMMUNISM WAS ABOUT.

So... not as ridiculous as you said UNLESS, those atheists named did it for power and political reasons AS DID THOSE WHO WHERE CHRISTIANS - did it for power and political reasons.

In fact, after 1941, suppression of religion was greatly relaxed, for Christians, Muslims, Jews and others (all of which existed in the Soviet Union). To gather support from the masses during World War II, the Stalin government re-opened thousands of temples and extinguished the league of militant atheists. Atheist propaganda returned to a lesser extent during the Khruschev government, and continued in a less strict way during the Breszhnev years.
If you can't beat them... join them? Cuba tried to eradicate Christianity but a funny thing happens, the more you try to stamp it out, the more the fire burns. :)

You see, your problem is not my problem. You have a problem with admitting that atheists do things in the name of atheism (as wrong as it may be) but I have no problem with admitting that Christians do things in the name of Christianity (as wrong as it may be).

What you WANT to do is say "Atheists are saints and never do anything in the name of atheism, even when they try to snuff out all vestiges of faith, but Christians and their God are not good and neither is their God". (An unequal weight)

However, God remains good all the time and man does what he does. Jesus is our example... when did He command sickness and death for evil or innocent people? NEVER! He healed and delivered ALL who were oppressed of the Devil (if they let Him)

Shalom

PS :) CAPS not shouting... just emphasis. :)
 
Last edited:

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
How many times, in these forums, have I heard it said that "humans bring it all on themselves.

Is there nobody who can see what utter nonsense this is?

Think of it for a moment: what, right now, today, are most ordinary people doing everywhere in the world? They're trying to survive, trying to bring up their children, feed them and educate them. And trying not to get noticed by the "powers that be." This is true in America. It's true in China, and Russia and North and South Korea, Somalia, Chad, England and even Tuvalu. Everywhere...it's what humans do!

Where, in this world, can you find a place where everybody in the whole society is acting with the kind of depravity that Christian love to accuse the antediluvians, the Sodomites, the Canaanites, and so many others of? WHERE? NO WHERE---THAT'S WHERE.

When humans resort to human sacrifice -- that's religion, that's the priests using their wiles to convince ordinary folk that that's how to appease God, or get rain, or be fertile, or get the crops to grow. Ordinary folk just go out in the field and plant corn, like they always did, and hope there's enough sun and rain to make it grow. When temple prostitution is used to try to encourage fertility, that's religion, that's the priests, pretending they know how to get the gods to favour their tribe over others -- when in fact they know diddly squat. Ordinary people are too busy with survival to be concerned with any of that nonsense.

How is it, I ask myself, that so many Christians seem to get this simple, fundamental point so horribly wrong? Does their religion actually reduce their ability to think reasonably? I really want to know!

Yes, abortions are a horrible thing, but wiping out entire cultures, including their children and infants seems to be okay.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
You're wrong. I've not changed...I'm who I always was.

OK... I guess I was looking at you differently.

You keep bringing that up, so I'll ask you a question: was every Canaanite killing children and buggering animals? All of them? Have you got any evidence of any sort whatsoever to demonstrate that this excessively unlikely scenario is the actual truth of a whole people?

Or perhaps you just have a few hints written by the victors, who, of course, never, ever distort the stories of those they defeated in order to look more justified themselves...oh my goodness, never! :rolleyes:

Or, perhaps, God saw:

1) The millions that would be sacrificed before they reached the age of 3
2) The multiplying effect in the degradation of the value of life since they apparently didn't had no problem with dissecting children in the name of their gods. Who knows, killing those of the neighboring groups?
3) Like children that are birthed with addictions because of the mother's lifestyle, infection that would be in children because of the Canaanites beastiality

And who know what else... We can only surmise by archaeological findings.

You can try as many arguments as you like, but they all fail, because, as I'm about to demonstrate, your arguments always result in an absurdity, and there's no way out of it.

I do not care which "omni" word you use -- omnipotent, omniscient -- the philosophical and logical problems are inescapable.

You think much too highly of yourself.

Let's try a little thought experiment. Let's pretend that you wish to build a structure in your front yard which is against the local zoning codes. But, hey, you have self-determination, so you can ignore those codes, right? However, you're also smart enough to know what those codes are, and what the consequences of ignoring them will be -- you will be forced to tear down your new structure at your own expense, after having built it at your own expense. You'll lose a lot of money and time, needlessly, and probably annoy your neighbours into the bargain.

???

The problem for an omniscient and omnipotent deity is much, much worse, because that deity must be aware that the very things he has brought (or is allowing) into creation will have to be destroyed by his own "law" and in contravention of his own "law."

This is why I say that an omniscient and omnipotent deity is a logical farce -- and it is made a trillion times worse when some religions, like Christianity, also insist that it is "loving," or (let's use the omni thing again), omnibenevolent. That sort of entity, knowing omnisciently beforehand how utterly useless his use of his omnipotence would be, would give himself an omnibenevolent hug, forget the entire thing, and go back to sleep.

Is there any logic? This is the totality of your effort?

It forgets and omits the ending of the story of Jesus. A new world.

The city loves you and gives you a lot so you can build a house and live happily ever after with one stipulation... don't build in the front yard so you built a house. God gave the world to you, me and mankind. Fruit trees, trees, herbs and the whole of the universe. Love and fellowship abounded and eternity was ours. All He said was "Love me enough to let me have just one tree. You have EVERYTHING else"

In both cases there are consequences.

You don't care and build it anyway and you loose a lot of money and have to tear it down. City still loves you, but there are consequences and just might evict you. You and I and the world sin anyway. God still omnibenevolently loves us and knowing there are consequences but He doesn't evict us. But the loving God goes a step further. He sends His son, tears down the construct (sin) Himself as the omniprovision one, goes to the city pays the bill and tells them, from here on I will pay all the fines and bills as the omniforgiving one.

Then says, "OK, in a not too distant future, we will start all over again and we will get it right this time".

But people still say, "Nothing doing. Who cares if you pay for it, love me through it, give me 33,000 chances, It's YOUR fault that I made bad choices and it is YOUR fault that other people make bad choices and I don't care if you DID prevent them from doing worse. IT IS ALL YOUR FAULT! And I still don't want you".

Ok.. It's a free country.

:D But He still loves the world for no greater love has a man than this, that he lay down his life for another. You, me and the world :D

:hugehug:
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
You are too funny. An you already know the cross changed things in some cases, eradicated things in some cases, left things in some cases and began new things in other cases.
It is completely wrong of you to say that I "already know" the cross changed everything. I cannot possibly "know" that since I don't even believe it. (See Epistemology).
To use "a thorn in the rest of your sides" is to willfully ignore the above statement which you already know. The thorns was on the head of Jesus and removes the curse, eradicates it even as it has done for you!
I was making reference to Paul's "thorn in my flesh."
As far as the historical fact of America? It remains historical! And, YES, some people DID do it to eradicate indigenous people, systematic reduction of their lands--on purpose, etc JUST AS ATHESTIC LENIN/STALIN/MAO did what they did in the name of their atheistic belief that they are their own gods.
You are being, I think, deliberately thick. You are refusing to understand what I'm saying so that you can then generalize to get to where you would prefer to be.

But understand this: whether or not SOME people tried to eradicate indigenous peoples, or even whether MANY people colluded in doing so, that was never the raison d'etre behind the formation or the political shaping of the United States. In the same way, Lenin, Stalin and Mao all had overriding political and economic theories that they wished to enforce on the whole peoples. Just think for a moment, or do some research: which one of them, EVER, said "oh, I don't care whether people are communist or capitalist, just so long as they don't believe in God, that's all I care about."
So... not as ridiculous as you said UNLESS, those atheists named did it for power and political reasons AS DID THOSE WHO WHERE CHRISTIANS - did it for power and political reasons.
And there you have it. That's what I said, and it's all I've ever said. And when the communists tried to stamp out religion, their reason was the remark by Marx, that "religion is the collective sigh of the oppressed..." and how can you claim to be creating your perfect world if the masses are sighing because they're oppressed?

Now, on the other hand, the fires at Smithfield, or the Campo dei Fiori, were specifically about those who professed essentially the same religion, but with different nuances. And those were ABOUT religion. And yes, of course, those fires also consumed atheists.
If you can't beat them... join them? Cuba tried to eradicate Christianity but a funny thing happens, the more you try to stamp it out, the more the fire burns. :)

You see, your problem is not my problem. You have a problem with admitting that atheists do things in the name of atheism (as wrong as it may be) but I have no problem with admitting that Christians do things in the name of Christianity (as wrong as it may be).

What you WANT to do is say "Atheists are saints and never do anything in the name of atheism, even when they try to snuff out all vestiges of faith, but Christians and their God are not good and neither is their God". (An unequal weight)

However, God remains good all the time and man does what he does. Jesus is our example... when did He command sickness and death for evil or innocent people? NEVER! He healed and delivered ALL who were oppressed of the Devil (if they let Him)

Shalom

PS :) CAPS not shouting... just emphasis. :)
Your level of misunderstanding is sometimes astounding. When, WHEN, did I ever say that atheists are saints? Never, that's when. But you are wrong if you suspect that the atheist steals "in the name of atheism," just as you would be wrong in saying that the Christian steals in the name of Christianity. They don't. They steal for greed, or for need, and sometimes because of illness (kleptomania).
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
It is completely wrong of you to say that I "already know" the cross changed everything. I cannot possibly "know" that since I don't even believe it.

And that is why we will always differ. I decided to believe and you decided not to. When I decided to believe I began to see miracles. I guess yours is still on tap.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
And that is why we will always differ. I decided to believe and you decided not to. When I decided to believe I began to see miracles. I guess yours is still on tap.
Let's examine that.

You see, I can't just "decide to believe." I see what's in front of me. I hear a lot of people tell me things about the world. I look at what I see, I look at what they tell me, then my mind itself assesses what is likely to be true. I cannot "decide to believe" what looks false to my analytical capacity. There is no circumstance in which I could put the following, Christian, ideas together:

  • God loves you,
  • God is in control of everything
  • God doesn't want you hurt
  • Your step father wants to kill you, so he does
  • God couldn't do anything about its
  • You die.
You would argue that God gave "free will" to the step father, and so couldn't do anything about it. What "free will" was given to the child who, let's be perfectly honest, freely willed not to be killed? Apparently, he didn't have it. The omnipotent gift of free will to one party doomed (at the expense of the omnipotence of God) the other.

Truth is what it is, not what you "decide" it is.

As you say, when you "decided to believe" you "began to see miracles." What did you see before? How did you decide that what was once not a miracle suddenly, somehow, was? And how did you discard all the hoped-for miracles that didn't happen? The answer to that, of course, is that you have been being selective...whatever you see, you make a personal decision to ascribe to God or not to. And of course, you ascribe to God all the good bits, and try to pretend that the same, all-encompassing God is not involved in the bad bits.

Ken, you are selective. The only possible way to hold belief in anything at all which is not "true," is to credit those things that support your belief, and ignore everything that contradicts it. Which is what I've watched you do for thousands of posts now. For me, I must look upon the world, see it for what it is. To pretend it is otherwise would make me, in my own mind, a liar.

You will never see it, but all my arguments say precisely the same thing: the world itself argues against the notion of your God. But you will only ever know that by looking at all the evidence before you, not by ignoring selective bits.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
  • God loves you,
  • God is in control of everything
  • God doesn't want you hurt
  • Your step father wants to kill you, so he does
  • God couldn't do anything about its
  • You die.

Yes... God does love us
No... God is not in control of everything
Yes... God doesn't want you hurt
Yes.... those things do happen
On tap - You ought to listen to that message
Yes... we all die somehow, somewhere and at sometime.

"You see, I can't just "decide to believe."" - True... it takes searching and, just maybe like in #2, you don't have it all figured out.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
Yes... God does love us.

But he creates infinite torture, in case we don't "love" him back-- that's extortion.
No... God is not in control of everything.

So, this "god" is either not competent, or not actually god-- may as well be some super-alien from another dimension, then.
Yes... God doesn't want you hurt.

Yet... created infinite torture-put with the express description of INFINITE HURT.

Contradiction!
Yes.... those things do happen.
And if **I** was able to prevent the murder? I would. Just like that? I'm more moral than your god. By a country mile...
On tap - You ought to listen to that message.

"message"? What "message"? The bible is an immoral book: it condones slavery and other immoral things.

Therefore, it cannot possibly be of Divine origin.
Yes... we all die somehow, somewhere and at sometime..

Indeed. You have a point?
"You see, I can't just "decide to believe."" - True... it takes searching and, just maybe like in #2, you don't have it all figured out.

I searched for 40+ years. All I found was this "god" was .... missing. Now what?
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
But he creates infinite torture, in case we don't "love" him back-- that's extortion.

No, infinite torture was created for Satan--not man.

But you do remind me of the criminal who said to the judge, "You are an extortionist, you only offer freedom if I do what you told me to do". :D

So, this "god" is either not competent, or not actually god-- may as well be some super-alien from another dimension, then.

No... He didn't create robots.

Yet... created infinite torture-put with the express description of INFINITE HURT.

Contradiction!

Pls see first answer - no contradiction

And if **I** was able to prevent the murder? I would. Just like that? I'm more moral than your god. By a country mile...

Can you stop your child from doing wrong when they have free will?

"message"? What "message"? The bible is an immoral book: it condones slavery and other immoral things.

Therefore, it cannot possibly be of Divine origin.

In your view...

Indeed. You have a point?

We agree on one thing :D

I searched for 40+ years. All I found was this "god" was .... missing. Now what?

Reminds me of me and my siblings looking for my mother's purse for 5 minutes and it was hanging on her arm all the time. :)

And with your attitude, I'm not surprised you can't see beyond your nose as you look in the mirror asking "Is there a God?"
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Evidence for such a claim please.

Your understanding of cosmology and gravitational effects is lacking.
and how many times have is posted.....????

no photo, no fingerprint, no equation and no repeatable experiment

there will NEVER BE EVIDENCE

all you CAN do is THINK about it

and yes I understand gravity

have you found the Cause ….?????
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
and how many times have is posted.....????

no photo, no fingerprint, no equation and no repeatable experiment

there will NEVER BE EVIDENCE

all you CAN do is THINK about it

and yes I understand gravity

have you found the Cause ….?????

Then dont make "apparently" definite claims of what is essentially a guess.

The effects of gravity, effects.

Have you?
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Then dont make "apparently" definite claims of what is essentially a guess.

The effects of gravity, effects.

Have you?
I will persist.....
at the moment of the big bang..gravity was only a thought in the mind of God

the rotation had to be in play BEFORE the expansion began

Cause and efeect
 
Top