how come god doesn't hang out with us? literally, physically.

[Penumbra]

To some extent, that would be the case.

Things that come with humanity.

Whining. Moaning. Getting upset at a little pain. Boasting about accomplishments of insignificance. Lying. Cowardice. Schadenfreude. Stupidity. Atheism. Hedonism. The list goes on.

Don't get me wrong. I don't mind some people, but humanity, and the sick and twisted cultures that are growing in the world now are cancerous.

Many described gods have one or more of those qualities.

Abrahamic deities are portrayed in their writings as highly destructive and in some cases enjoying misery. And some of them whine a lot and boast of their accomplishments.

Krishna was rather hedonistic, wasn't he? There are violent Hindu gods as well.

Why is atheism lumped in with all of those things? What's the issue there?

And from an evolutionary perspective, if gods made the universe and little cells formed and then turned into multi-cellular organisms and then turned into sapient creatures that nonetheless still have much of the aggressive/selfish/pleasure-seeking instincts that allowed their predecessors and themselves to survive to this point by means of natural selection, why would the gods complain then about the current outcome, or necessarily be any different from it?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Penumbra, I'm jealous. You always explain things better than I do.

 

[Koldo]

Why should they?

Why not?

Yes, it is. I'm also an English as a foreign language teacher.
I thought what I said was clear enough. I'm saying what I want to say. You obviously just want me to say more.

Not at all.

I expected a higher standard of reading comprehension.
I guess we're both surprised.

Hey, don't put the blame on me.
You are lacking communication skills. Which is odd for a foreign language teacher. Since you didn't clearly say what you meant to say.

 

[Breathe]

Many described gods have one or more of those qualities.

Not like I believe in "gods" as actual entities, anyway, but gods are less numerous, for one.

Abrahamic deities are portrayed in their writings as highly destructive and in some cases enjoying misery. And some of them whine a lot and boast of their accomplishments.

I don't think so.
And even then, they can: they're gods.

Krishna was rather hedonistic, wasn't he?

Not really.

There are violent Hindu gods as well.

Not quite the same type of violence, here.

Why is atheism lumped in with all of those things? What's the issue there?

Something long and complex, and I have neither the time, energy, nor patience to write it out now as I'm about to go to sleep, but basically:

From a survival perspective: the things that follow atheism as opposed to it being just merely lack of belief.
From a personal perspective: I see atheism as a blind position, and the attitudes and ignorance of an increasing number of atheists are reason for me to hate humans many times over.

It's my experiences with so many diverse people and finding out so many of them are utter scum that has made me end up hating most people. As they say, familiarity breeds contempt.

And from an evolutionary perspective, if gods made the universe and little cells formed and then turned into multi-cellular organisms and then turned into sapient creatures that nonetheless still have much of the aggressive/selfish/pleasure-seeking instincts that allowed their predecessors and themselves to survive to this point by means of natural selection, why would the gods complain then about the current outcome, or necessarily be any different from it?

Nothing to do with what I'm saying.
I'm saying I'd side with God, gods, or angels almost every time. I'm not guessing "why". I'm only stating "if", that I would side with them, even if it was against humanity.

 

[Breathe]

Why not?

Not their choice.

Not at all.

Then why try to get me to say more?

Hey, don't put the blame on me.
You are lacking communication skills. Which is odd for a foreign language teacher. Since you didn't clearly say what you meant to say.

I write briefly online. I keep things short. I'm fed up of writing long posts only to have them ignored or distorted and I have neither the time nor patience. The medication doesn't help either.

I said it clear enough to understand it. It's not my fault if you failed to comprehend it.

 

[Koldo]

Not their choice.

Not their choice to make, or not what they chose?

Then why try to get me to say more?

Indeed, why?
Who was doing that?

I write briefly online. I keep things short. I'm fed up of writing long posts only to have them ignored or distorted and I have neither the time nor patience. The medication doesn't help either.

I said it clear enough to understand it. It's not my fault if you failed to comprehend it.

If you read your posts again, I am sure you will notice where the problem lies in them.

 

[Breathe]

Not their choice to make, or not what they chose?

The former.

If you read your posts again, I am sure you will notice where the problem lies in them.

I did. I even asked another to review. No issue.

 

[Koldo]

The former.

Why not?

I did. I even asked another to review. No issue.

A friend of yours, I assume. Huh?

 

[Tumah]

I don't mean hang out with us in spirit, but actually there in person. If god is like us, made into the same image, etc. why not visit like friends and family do? at least once, and again, not in spirit but physically in person instead. especially if god wants us to live according to gods needs or wants.

If we were made in the same physical image as G-d, that would lead to some rather awkward questions vis a vis G-d's existence prior to the creation of the physical world. As well as some interesting questions about why G-d would need to have such an appearance.

 

[Tumah]

And from an evolutionary perspective, if gods made the universe and little cells formed and then turned into multi-cellular organisms and then turned into sapient creatures that nonetheless still have much of the aggressive/selfish/pleasure-seeking instincts that allowed their predecessors and themselves to survive to this point by means of natural selection, why would the gods complain then about the current outcome, or necessarily be any different from it?

Although I don't agree with the premise, I think the answer to your question might be that at a certain stage in the developmental process it became possible for a human to overcome his instinct and it was at that point in time that G-d would begin to hold it against those that don't.

 

[Breathe]

Why not?

Because "my free will!", and they shouldn't have to.

A friend of yours, I assume. Huh?

Yeah. Is there something wrong with that?

 

[Willamena]

Why not?

Because if they make what is what it isn't, then what it isn't becomes what is, and they have not changed a thing.


Eris cheats.

 

[Koldo]

Because "my free will!", and they shouldn't have to.

I never mentioned any 'should'.

Do you mean they can't make that kind of choice because of our free will?
So our free will supersedes gods'?! woah.

Yeah. Is there something wrong with that?

Other than bias? Not really.

 

[Koldo]

Because if they make what is what it isn't, then what it isn't becomes what is, and they have not changed a thing.


Eris cheats.

I need to find out where I left Harmonia's phone number.
It is around here....somewhere....

Eris...you...did it again!

 

[Breathe]

Do you mean they can't make that kind of choice because of our free will?
So our free will supersedes gods'?! woah.

Not quite, no.

 

[Koldo]

Not quite, no.

Then how does that work?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What makes you think they would delight in it?

If they didn't enjoy it, then it doesn't make much sense for some of them to take part in it multiple times. With some deities, that's pretty much all they do.

Perhaps.

Then how are you any better than those who enjoy the misfortunes of others?

Hedonism is selfishness glorified. It is cancerous.

Hedonism isn't exactly selfishness. It just means that either pleasure is the highest good or it's at least a main motivating factor in a person's life. Doesn't mean that you only care about your pleasure. In fact, I would say that you wouldn't be much of a hedonist if you only cared about your pleasure.

Atheism as an ontological outlook? Nothing. Some things that follow it and present themselves as 'atheism', though, such as anti-theism, are things I consider to be dangerous.

I think all this talk about "anti-theism" being such a horrible thing is overblown. Exactly which dangers are theists subjected to from these oh-so-terrifying anti-theists?

 

[Breathe]

If they didn't enjoy it, then it doesn't make much sense for some of them to take part in it multiple times.

Does a homeowner enjoy killing pests invading the kitchen every year, or does the homeowner do it because it needs to be done?

Then how are you any better than those who enjoy the misfortunes of others?

Humans against humans is a tragedy. It is brother fighting brother.
Gods purguing humans would be cleansing of a sickness.

I think all this talk about "anti-theism" being such a horrible thing is overblown. Exactly which dangers are theists subjected to from these oh-so-terrifying anti-theists?

Anti-theists aren't terrifying, they are just irritating filth.
I don't think you would ever believe me, anyway.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Does a homeowner enjoy killing pests invading the kitchen every year, or does the homeowner do it because it needs to be done?

A homeowner isn't responsible for an entire paradigm where such killings would be inevitable, as with certain god concepts.

Humans against humans is a tragedy. It is brother fighting brother.
Gods purguing humans would be cleansing of a sickness.

A "sickness" that would be of its own creation.

I still don't see how that makes you any better than someone else enjoying the misfortune of another. It just makes you a hypocrite.

Anti-theists aren't terrifying, they are just irritating filth.

You said anti-theism is "dangerous". I'd like to know why you think opposition to at least certain types of theism are more of a threat than, say, theistic extremism.

I don't think you would ever believe me, anyway.

Of course not. I have no reason to.

 

[Breathe]

A homeowner isn't responsible for an entire paradigm where such killings would be inevitable, as with certain god concepts.

Not necessarily.

A "sickness" that would be of its own creation.

Not necessarily.

I still don't see how that makes you any better than someone else enjoying the misfortune of another.

I don't delight in it against others. On a small scale.
Pain of one is a tragedy, pain of many is a statistic.

It just makes you a hypocrite.

That makes me equal to all people.

Of course not. I have no reason to.

And that is why I'm not going to waste my time.
Even if I stated why, you wouldn't believe it. Why waste my time?