Prayers. Why some people think God is fool ?

[chinu]

So, you are using the “humble” card to explain why praying to God has the same expected return as praying to, say, a chair?

ciao

- viole

Not chair, Fool. Please re-read OP once again.

 

[chinu]

However, your example here is also interesting. Someone commits a wrong against another person, and in your example, the courts fail to do anything due to lack of evidence. Of course, if we assume God to be all-knowing, then He or She wouldn't need any evidence, because He or She would already know who's guilty. There have been plenty of instance of criminals getting away with their crimes, without any apparent punishment whatsoever. This is especially true with monarchs, dictators, and other tyrants who have remained in power their entire lives. God does nothing to punish them in this life or do anything to cause them to fall out of power. At best, God apparently takes His own sweet time to bring about some form of "justice," and as the saying goes "Justice delayed is justice denied."

First of all.. its "Nature" that punish, NOT God. (Please re read my previous post)
Second, "Nature" has NO right to take anybody's free-will. But, of course "Nature" is entitled to punish if done something wrong.

If this is true, then why do most religions consider murder to be the most egregious sin? If life is meaningless, then the taking of life should be considered equally meaningless, right? Why should we consider it a holy act to feed the hungry? Wouldn't it be more noble and moral to let them die so they can reach God's world even faster?

There's a rebirth after murder. Murder doesn't mean one will reach God's world after that.

There's no evidence that God has ever contacted anyone, interested or not.

Have you ever been interested ?

"We" made this demand? When did "we" do that?

This demand was made a long time back when we all were the citizen of God's world.

If it's a video game, then it might be a case where "the only winning move is not to play." Because the current set up for the game entails "he who dies with the most toys wins." This appears to be the case with every major religion. There is no "justice" in a game, and if God is supposedly the "referee" in this game, then it's patently obvious that God has been lackadaisical or absent when it comes to calling out any penalties for cheating or breaking the rules. Religion tells us that God may punish them or forgive them, but only after the game is over.

The game only works if the penalties are called and dealt with during the game.

Why are you behaving in a manner that this video game is OVER ?
This video game is not OVER. Its currently going on, in fact it just started and its going on -- levels one after the another.

You have only two options. Play the game for next level. Or, quit playing.

Choice is yours.

 

[chinu]

I don't know where you live, but the people round my way don't deserve to have their children die, their house burn down, or a wrongful conviction entered against them.
Have you considered moving to a better neighborhood?

Its mother "Nature" who will decide what one deserves, or NOT.
Who are you / people to decide this ?

 

[blü 2]

Its mother "Nature" who will decide what one deserves, or NOT.
Who are you / people to decide this ?

Sure, nature is arbitrary and we evolved to be us in nature.

But God is supposed to be omnipotent, benevolent, on the ball, according to [his] billing. And [he] ain't.

 

[chinu]

Sure, nature is arbitrary and we evolved to be us in nature.

But God is supposed to be omnipotent, benevolent, on the ball, according to [his] billing. And [he] ain't.

So, what is God's mistake here ?

 

[blü 2]

So, what is God's mistake here ?

Pretending to exist?

 

[chinu]

Pretending to exist?

As omnipotent, benevolent. You mean ?

 

[Stevicus]

First of all.. its "Nature" that punish, NOT God. (Please re read my previous post)
Second, "Nature" has NO right to take anybody's free-will. But, of course "Nature" is entitled to punish if done something wrong.

So, Nature has free will? Nature is separate from God? God doesn't control Nature?

There's a rebirth after murder. Murder doesn't mean one will reach God's world after that.

That doesn't really answer the question I asked. You said the life in this world was meaningless.

Have you ever been interested ?

Yes, in the past, I have been interested.

This demand was made a long time back when we all were the citizen of God's world.

I don't recall ever being a citizen of God's world or making any demands. In fact, there are even parts of my own life that I cannot recall. This is where most religionists' arguments about "free will" fall apart, since human memory is fallible and sometimes unreliable.

Why are you behaving in a manner that this video game is OVER ?
This video game is not OVER. Its currently going on, in fact it just started and its going on -- levels one after the another.

You have only two options. Play the game for next level. Or, quit playing.

Choice is yours.

But as you said, the game itself is essentially meaningless. It's not really necessary to pray or believe in God in order to keep playing. You mentioned Nature earlier, and Nature seems to be the only actual "rules" of this particular game - and those rules don't seem logically congruent with God's rules (as expressed by religionists).

 

[chinu]

But as you said, the game itself is essentially meaningless. It's not really necessary to pray or believe in God in order to keep playing. You mentioned Nature earlier, and Nature seems to be the only actual "rules" of this particular game - and those rules don't seem logically congruent with God's rules (as expressed by religionists).

I don't about what religionists say, or say NOT.

I only explain as what I believe.

 

[blü 2]

As omnipotent, benevolent. You mean ?

I guess that's included, but ─ just pretending to exist.

 

[chinu]

I guess that's included, but ─ just pretending to exist.

What makes you think that where God is making mistake by being so and exist ?

 

[Stevicus]

I don't about what religionists say, or say NOT.

I only explain as what I believe.

So in your belief, there are no "rules to the game" (other than Nature)?

 

[chinu]

So in your belief, there are no "rules to the game" (other than Nature)?

According to me there's only one rule.. "Do with others as what do you aspect for yourself" But, this mere rule is just to spend some good & easy time while in the game, rather than facing hard times. Otherwise, smart decision is to quit out of this meaningless game, and that's what God want all of us to do. Trying to quit out of this meaningless game is the real devotion to God.

 

[Stevicus]

According to me there's only one rule.. "Do with others as what do you aspect for yourself" But, this mere rule is just to spend some good & easy time while in the game, rather than facing hard times. Otherwise, smart decision is to quit out of this meaningless game, and that's what God want all of us to do. Trying to quit out of this meaningless game is the real devotion to God.

Well, for some reason, I feel compelled to let the game run its course. The one rule you state sounds similar to the Golden Rule, which many people practice. It just seems like simple decency, which I can agree with. Although it doesn't require any belief in God to do that. It's simply a matter of people agreeing to treat each other honorably and compassionately. That's the essence of human politics.

 

[blü 2]

What makes you think that where God is making mistake by being so and exist ?

There are two ways of looking at God ─ from within the story, and from outside the story.

From within the story, God is omnipotent, omniscient, perfect and anything else the story says ─ benevolent, depressed, absent, indifferent, idle, green, whatever. The choice of qualities in the story may have logical consequences, such as the incompatibility of theological free will and theological omnipotence / omniscience / perfection.

From outside the story, God is an imaginary or conceptual being without objective existence ─ which is why God can be anything anyone likes. And since we find supernatural beliefs in just about every culture on earth, we can start wondering why we've evolved to believe in gods ─ probably, I think, because they're part of tribal identity for the individual and thus tribal solidarity for the group (along with having language, customs, stories, heroes, location and so on in common).

From inside the story, God's billing in the West has largely been Christian, omnipotent, omniscient and so on. And when you look at reality, that raises the moral question I've been referring to ─ that if God is real, [he]'s a moral failure by human standards, allowing rogues and fools to flourish and honest and decent folk to suffer, a being who being omnipotent can do anything [he] wishes without cost or effort to [him]self and simply doesn't.

Why not? Because [he]'s imaginary. That's obvious from outside the story, but usually against the rules from inside the story.

Where do you yourself stand? Inside the story or outside, or both?

And with reference to your OP, do you personally think God is a fool? Or just an imaginary fool? How do you see it?

 

[chinu]

There are two ways of looking at God ─ from within the story, and from outside the story.

From within the story, God is omnipotent, omniscient, perfect and anything else the story says ─ benevolent, depressed, absent, indifferent, idle, green, whatever. The choice of qualities in the story may have logical consequences, such as the incompatibility of theological free will and theological omnipotence / omniscience / perfection.

From outside the story, God is an imaginary or conceptual being without objective existence ─ which is why God can be anything anyone likes. And since we find supernatural beliefs in just about every culture on earth, we can start wondering why we've evolved to believe in gods ─ probably, I think, because they're part of tribal identity for the individual and thus tribal solidarity for the group (along with having language, customs, stories, heroes, location and so on in common).

From inside the story, God's billing in the West has largely been Christian, omnipotent, omniscient and so on. And when you look at reality, that raises the moral question I've been referring to ─ that if God is real, [he]'s a moral failure by human standards, allowing rogues and fools to flourish and honest and decent folk to suffer, a being who being omnipotent can do anything [he] wishes without cost or effort to [him]self and simply doesn't.

Why not? Because [he]'s imaginary. That's obvious from outside the story, but usually against the rules from inside the story.

Where do you yourself stand? Inside the story or outside, or both?

And with reference to your OP, do you personally think God is a fool? Or just an imaginary fool? How do you see it?

How can one stand outside the story, until really being outside the story ?

 

[blü 2]

How can one stand outside the story, until really being outside the story ?

As for inside, Jesus as story, one can talk about the Jesuses of the NT and who they respectively were and what, in the stories, they respectively said and did, the problems they faced, their options and decisions and the purposes those things suggest or the problems they raise.

As for outside, Jesus as history, one can talk about the obvious fictions in the NT, the stories common to all or most versions of Jesus and the points at which the tales seriously contradict each other, the society in which they were written, the beliefs regarding magic, souls and ghosts in that time and place, the influences of Greek over Jewish culture, the problem of whether there was an historical Jesus at all, and so on.

As for inside, since Peter Pettigrew was one of the creators of the Marauders' Map, why didn't he create another one for Voldemort?

As for outside, was there an historical person whom Rowling had in mind when she created Harry Potter or Dumbledore? Are the Harry Potter stories a Christian parable about having to die voluntarily before one can live free of some kind of curse, perhaps like 'original sin'? Is the name 'Kings Cross Station' a Christian allusion?

What do you think?