Since Christians like to claim that Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection was amply prophesied, please point out specifically which passages you think predict these events and why, for example, the Jews got their own prophetic tradition so wrong that they needed later Gentiles to explain it to them. Furthermore, please explain, in your own words, why the supreme being, the creator of the cosmos, couldn't come up with a better scheme of salvation than a human blood sacrifice told of in a book based on oral traditions and hearsay and whose final form was decided on in a vote centuries later. That seems more like the messy workings of history and human institutions, rather than anything like a 'divine plan'.

(October 3, 2016 at 4:25 pm)lighthouse Wrote: -snipped for brevity.

I don't believe you, nor can my conscience sign onboard to an escape button for the consequences of our misdeeds, as related by the story.  If god is, firstly, and if god is the god of love...secondly, and if this is gods expression of that love I cannot and must not accept.  What else can be said?  
 


To be forced to live a certain way is not love. You have no evidence that wind exists you only have evidence of what effect it has and how it feels and that is exactly like God. You can see the impact he has had on other people's lives that they devote their whole lives to him and if you ever meet someone with the passion for him you will be able to feel him as well. He has not showed you any hate and your eyes are not open to his love so how would you accept.

I'm sorry, I misunderstand, was your school project to come here and argue with me, or to collect my feedback, lol? Was your school project to bicker over the existence of evidence...for the wind....? Was your school project to come here and argue for the existence of believing god-botherers and various, assorted, devotees? Was your school project to tell me that I have no right to be angry with a being I'm not angry with, and do not believe in?

I do not believe in god, and could not, in good conscience, accept the offer that god is supposed to have made. That's all. There's nothing more to it. Whether or not your god is the god of love is an irrelevance to me. Aphrodite was a goddess of love, and I don't believe in or worship her either..on account of that similarity.

(October 3, 2016 at 4:25 pm)lighthouse Wrote: -snipped for brevity.

I don't believe you, nor can my conscience sign onboard to an escape button for the consequences of our misdeeds, as related by the story.  If god is, firstly, and if god is the god of love...secondly, and if this is gods expression of that love I cannot and must not accept.  What else can be said?  

So you'll consider him a loving god no matter what then?

Quote:To be forced to live a certain way is not love. You have no evidence that wind exists you only have evidence of what effect it has and how it feels and that is exactly like God. You can see the impact he has had on other people's lives that they devote their whole lives to him and if you ever meet someone with the passion for him you will be able to feel him as well.

Hold on. The wind thing is easy, since this comes up often. Wind cannot be seen as much as other solid things, but that doesn't mean that we don't have evidence for it. We can still sense it and test it. You can't say the same for your god.

Are you now changing the subject to evidence for your god now, though? I thought you were arguing about him being a loving god. What is the topic here?

Quote:He has not showed you any hate and your eyes are not open to his love so how would you accept.

He hasn't shown me anything. As soon as I actually see this happen, I may change my mind. To get this back to the topic though, if the stories from the bible are to be believed, I would certainly classify much of that as wrath, if not entirely hate.

(October 3, 2016 at 3:21 pm)lighthouse Wrote: This is for a school project to post a christian post on an atheist site and answer questions or reply to comments. Please be mature and give feedback.

Q: If God is a God of love, why would he create humans knowing the mass majority would end up in hell?

A: God is indeed a God of love. He loves all of his creations yet holds humanity among his favourite and loves them more than the others. First and foremost he created us with the gift of freewill. He gave us a perfect earth with no death or sickness. It was all just sex, good food, beautiful views, and tame animals. God had a very personal relationship with Adam and Eve. He didn’t force them into loving him back. He gave them an escape button. They took it. He is always chasing after our hearts and only wants us to chase after his heart.  His love is not forced and he gives us an option. Think of it as you have 5 children. Three of them will end up addicted to drugs and being thrown into prison for stealing and murder. The other two will solve world hunger, cure cancer, and lead the nations with strong morality. You have a choice to kill them all or raise them all. God chooses to raise them all up with the same amount of love and chances to love him back. Only two choose to love him back and let him pure his knowledge and supernatural love into and the other two rejected him yet he was still with them even if they couldn’t see.

Hi Lighthouse.

So, the only choice humans are given is to love God or to suffer eternal punsihment.  Do you feel those are very equal options?

As to your analogy, if I had 5 children, I think it is pretty extreme to assume that they will either be murderers or saviors.  Perhaps some of them will chose not to follow in my footsteps, and perhaps even become estranged from me for one reason or another, but they will still be good, decent people.  Perhaps those that chose to suck up to me will secretly be serial killers.  You analogy makes no sense to me, at all.  It is very black and white.  It seems that you see people as either good which means those that love God, or evil which is those that do not.

Our job as parents is to raise children that will go be productive members of society independent of their parents.  If my children do not love me back, nor cling to me forever, I would not send them to eternal punishment.  How is that part loving?  My love for my child is unconditional. Any punishment I do give them will fit the crime, and have the intent of making them better in the long run.  Eternal punishment, by definition, cannot make a person better, as you cannot learn from it and maybe then come back to god.  It's eternal.

The god you describe demands love in return for his kindnesses, and if it is not received, punishes.  Please explain to me how a God that cannot even do what a human mother can do, can be called a God of Love?

(October 3, 2016 at 4:02 pm)lighthouse Wrote:

(October 3, 2016 at 3:53 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: I see a really terrible analogy in the provided answer.

If I squint, I also see a duck.

you have a better one?


 I like ducks

Well, for starters, god isn't the meek, "oh, golly, I hope one of my kids calls me on my birthday" parent sitting on the sidelines you try to portray him as.  He's a tyrant.  The entire OT is evidence of that.

"But, he totally mellowed out during the NT!"  Really?  So, that's why he made a son for the explicit purpose of him getting tortured and killed via crucifixion?  

Sorry, but that's BS.

Original sin is a dumb, immoral concept.  Vicarious redemption through blood sacrifice is a dumb, immoral concept.  Giving people free will, but then punishing them for exercising that free will (in addition to whatever consequences they may face for their actions on earth) is a dumb, immoral concept.  Creating a one-size-fits-all punishment of eternal fire and torment for finite crimes is a dumb, immoral concept.

No matter how you try to put lipstick on it, your god is a terrible, terrible being.  Thankfully for everyone, it doesn't exist.

(October 3, 2016 at 4:24 pm)Jesster Wrote:

Quote:15 Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword.

16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.

17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it.

18 Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.

I'm really confused about what love means

The story behind this one is of Babylon. This passage was a vision a prophet had to warn the sinners of the city. It was a warning from God that this is what is to come if you keep on living the way that makes him displeased. It was also a way to pause and reflect on how currupt the nature of man has become. It was in no way an order to rape and murder. But that their enemies will overtake them and God would erupt a volcano nearby.

Quote:A: God is indeed a God of love. He loves all of his creations yet holds humanity among his favourite and loves them more than the others.

Isn't that a bit like suggesting that Hitler really respected the jews?

IKR, if all of this methodical carnage and misery is included within the breadth of what it is to love and respect someone, I don't know how I'm supposed to have a conversation with a person who uses that term, to cover it.  

Shit reads like swahili to me...... / shrugs

(October 3, 2016 at 4:41 pm)lighthouse Wrote:

(October 3, 2016 at 4:24 pm)Jesster Wrote: I'm really confused about what love means

The story behind this one is of Babylon. This passage was a vision a prophet had to warn the sinners of the city. It was a warning from God that this is what is to come if you keep on living the way that makes him displeased. It was also a way to pause and reflect on how currupt the nature of man has become. It was in no way an order to rape and murder. But that their enemies will overtake them and God would erupt a volcano nearby.

So your god will predict that this is going to happen and allow it anyway? Some people may be considered "corrupt", but to just be okay with raping women and smashing children if their people don't change their ways is far from love. That's not a good punishment for displeasing anyone.

Please define love in your own words.

(October 3, 2016 at 4:40 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Well, for starters, god isn't the meek, "oh, golly, I hope one of my kids calls me on my birthday" parent sitting on the sidelines you try to portray him as.  

Not so fast! The pathetic "I hope one of my kids calls me on my birthday" schtick is mine. Let me try on this 'God' persona for a bit. I might like it.

<Gazes into a mirror, trying different voices>  "You will love me as I love you or . . . I'll . . ." <shakes fist impotently> ". . . I'll damn you and smite you!

*sigh* Perhaps this god thing really isn't my bag. I love my kids way too much for that shit.

Oh well, now I feel like reading about a petulant tyrant of a father. <considers the Bible but picks up "King Lear" instead. shrugs> 

Better writer.