(September 25, 2017 at 5:12 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: To be fair, what Astonished says to/about theists is much worse, more smug, and more condescending than what Steve II said on his post...

If it helps to know, my upcoming genocide will not be selecting people on their race, religion, or gender, but on their usefulness to the on-going success of the human species

For instance, climate scientists get to stay, politicians get to go.

(September 25, 2017 at 5:59 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote:

(September 25, 2017 at 5:12 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: To be fair, what Astonished says to/about theists is much worse, more smug, and more condescending than what Steve II said on his post...

If it helps to know, my upcoming genocide will not be selecting people on their race, religion, or gender, but on their usefulness to the on-going success of the human species

For instance, climate scientists get to stay, politicians get to go.

*loud, nervous gulp*

(September 25, 2017 at 5:21 pm)emjay Wrote:

(September 25, 2017 at 5:12 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: To be fair, what Astonished says to/about theists is much worse, more smug, and more condescending than what Steve II said on his post...

Mine was just a general comment really, but with his post reminding me of him at his best... brought on by the fact that this thread has made me miserable and angry, and I've lost a friend through it (ie you)... so nothing to lose really by getting it all out of my system. Nothing much else to say though... I think I've got most of my ire out of my system.

I'm sorry this has effected you so negatively...

I think the little spat between us stemmed from my own misunderstanding and not from any real sentiment on our parts. I'd like to still consider you a friend if you'll forgive me.

Hi Steveall

It seems like a forum where people are keen to win arguments rather than have an open discussion, but that is true of most forums. It was a culmination of points made by both Hitchens and Harris that started me thinking and probably the biggest stumbling block for me is the concept of the biblical hell. I know most if not all the Christian apologetics for the fairness of hell and as a former evangelist openly used them in defense of the gospel. But after stepping back and attempting to be objective and as honest as I am able I can't marry the concept of a loving a God and eternal torture.
My grandmother recently died, and though she was probably one of the most moral, upright and loving people I have ever known, she never came to accept the gospel. So according to the scriptures, she will spend eternity being perpetually tortured. If she were alive today and anyone attempted to harm her I would spring to her defense with my very life. Anyone that incarcerated and tortured her for whatever perceived wrongs she may have committed would be worthy of only contempt and death (especially if I managed to get my hands on them).So, would it be possible for me to enjoy the biblical heaven, knowing that my grandmother and a multitude of other people were being tortured day and night without reprieve for all eternity? The answer is no. I may well be wrong and end up in hell for all eternity (and according to the Bible it will be worse for me as I have known the truth and walked away). But heaven would be just as much of a hell for me, knowing that people I love are suffering while I enjoy the benefits of redemption. Does this prove that the Bible is wrong and that God does not exist? No, it proves nothing, but it is where I am at and I will face the consequences.

(September 25, 2017 at 5:59 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote:

(September 25, 2017 at 5:12 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: To be fair, what Astonished says to/about theists is much worse, more smug, and more condescending than what Steve II said on his post...

If it helps to know, my upcoming genocide will not be selecting people on their race, religion, or gender, but on their usefulness to the on-going success of the human species

For instance, climate scientists get to stay, politicians get to go.

I just want to get this out there before the carnage starts: I have few truly useful skills but did inherit fairly good genes.

And I'll mate enthusiastically for the continued success of the species.

(September 25, 2017 at 6:03 pm)beepete Wrote: Hi Steveall

It seems like a forum where people are keen to win arguments rather than have an open discussion, but that is true of most forums. It was a culmination of points made by both Hitchens and Harris that started me thinking and probably the biggest stumbling block for me is the concept of the biblical hell. I know most if not all the Christian apologetics for the fairness of hell and as a former evangelist openly used them in defense of the gospel. But after stepping back and attempting to be objective and as honest as I am able I can't marry the concept of a loving a God and eternal torture.
My grandmother recently died, and though she was probably one of the most moral, upright and loving people I have ever known, she never came to accept the gospel. So according to the scriptures, she will spend eternity being perpetually tortured. If she were alive today and anyone attempted to harm her I would spring to her defense with my very life. Anyone that incarcerated and tortured her for whatever perceived wrongs she may have committed would be worthy of only contempt and death (especially if I managed to get my hands on them).So, would it be possible for me to enjoy the biblical heaven, knowing that my grandmother and a multitude of other people were being tortured day and night without reprieve for all eternity? The answer is no. I may well be wrong and end up in hell for all eternity (and according to the Bible it will be worse for me as I have known the truth and walked away). But heaven would be just as much of a hell for me, knowing that people I love are suffering while I enjoy the benefits of redemption. Does this prove that the Bible is wrong and that God does not exist? No, it proves nothing, but it is where I am at and I will face the consequences.

The thing about hell I find most interesting is that it paints the Christian god as being incredibly petty and vindictive. Now, it differs by which of the Baskin-Robbins flavors of Christianity you believe in, but generally speaking, good works won't save a person if the reject the divinity of Christ.

That never made much sense to me. I mean, what is rejection, really? It's just an emotional slight, right? We tell our youth that, hey, not everyone is going to like you, but that's okay. Just be the best person you can be, and someone will come along who will like you. People get rejected for things all the time. Promotions, job offers, dates, marriage, trips out, insurance coverage, etc. But, generally, we don't torture those who reject us. Yet, here's this supposedly omnipotent, omniscient being, who by definition should be above such petty human emotions, and what does he do? Sets up a place to torture people who rejected his son/himself. Not only that, but this torture is eternal. An eternal punishment for a microscopic slight from an insignificant monkey-thing made of dust and blood.

I mean, I never asked Jesus to sacrifice himself for me (not that I actually think it happened, but let's roll with it). I find such sacrifice by proxy meaningless. "This guy you never met died for you, specifically to atone for your sins... shouldn't you feel bad/guilty and do what he wants?" No, not really. Because the notion of sin is ridiculous (once again, a perfect being getting all huffy because his blood/dust monkey men didn't behave just so), and, well, what have I done that requires someone dying to make up for it? Not believe in an illogical being that has no evidence of actually existing? My imaginary great-great-great-great-great-...-great-grandmother eating a magic fruit, causing god to curse humanity because he was really embarrassed that, despite his omniscience, he didn't baby-proof Eden well enough, nor did he take his creation's innate curiosity into account?

Laughable.

So, it should make you feel better that there's no hell. No heaven, too. Just oblivion. And that's why it's important to live this life to the fullest. It's the only one we know we have.

(September 25, 2017 at 6:01 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 25, 2017 at 5:21 pm)emjay Wrote: Mine was just a general comment really, but with his post reminding me of him at his best... brought on by the fact that this thread has made me miserable and angry, and I've lost a friend through it (ie you)... so nothing to lose really by getting it all out of my system. Nothing much else to say though... I think I've got most of my ire out of my system.

I'm sorry this has effected you so negatively...

I think the little spat between us stemmed from my own misunderstanding and not from any real sentiment on our parts. I'd like to still consider you a friend if you'll forgive me.

Well basically I periodically get angry with theists and then it turns into tunnel vision, stereotyping and all that. But I don't like it when I get like that... anger is a miserable state to be in... I'd much rather be in a Buddhisty type of mindset... it just sometimes I'm less mindful than I'd like to be and when it's like that it's hard to get out of.

The problem with this particular issue is that as AFTT47 said earlier in the thread, atheist and theists are always going to be at odds over this issue. So there's two choices really; live in anger over this issue and throw the baby out with the bathwater (ie Christian friendships)... over something we're never realistically going to see eye to eye on, or just try and move past it.

I see you've rerepped me... but I wouldn't be in such a hurry to do that, because I still stand by what I said. But it was never meant to imply that I thought you were an abuser, or potential abuser. But just that this is something that comes from exposing a child extensively to any worldview. Ie if I was a parent I'd like to think that I would also practice what I preach and not over-expose my child to my atheistic worldview... and thus let them reach adulthood and decide for themselves with as little prior bias as possible... if they then chose to look into theism I would have absolutely no problem with that. But the main thing is, that they are fully capable of full rational thought and fully informed decision-making before they are exposed to this sort of information... that whatever beliefs result come through the front door as it were, as a result of their own curiosity and endeavours sans any outside-influence, rather than through the back door as result of familiarity, bias, repetition etc.

(September 25, 2017 at 6:03 pm)beepete Wrote: Hi Steveall

It seems like a forum where people are keen to win arguments rather than have an open discussion, but that is true of most forums. It was a culmination of points made by both Hitchens and Harris that started me thinking and probably the biggest stumbling block for me is the concept of the biblical hell. I know most if not all the Christian apologetics for the fairness of hell and as a former evangelist openly used them in defense of the gospel. But after stepping back and attempting to be objective and as honest as I am able I can't marry the concept of a loving a God and eternal torture.
My grandmother recently died, and though she was probably one of the most moral, upright and loving people I have ever known, she never came to accept the gospel. So according to the scriptures, she will spend eternity being perpetually tortured. If she were alive today and anyone attempted to harm her I would spring to her defense with my very life. Anyone that incarcerated and tortured her for whatever perceived wrongs she may have committed would be worthy of only contempt and death (especially if I managed to get my hands on them).So, would it be possible for me to enjoy the biblical heaven, knowing that my grandmother and a multitude of other people were being tortured day and night without reprieve for all eternity? The answer is no. I may well be wrong and end up in hell for all eternity (and according to the Bible it will be worse for me as I have known the truth and walked away). But heaven would be just as much of a hell for me, knowing that people I love are suffering while I enjoy the benefits of redemption. Does this prove that the Bible is wrong and that God does not exist? No, it proves nothing, but it is where I am at and I will face the consequences.

I think of it more as correcting people's misconceptions about definitions, concepts, biblical content, etc., and asking anyone making bald-faced claims to actually put up or shut up. Doesn't usually succeed because they're usually talking out their asses.

The problem of evil automatically demolishes the idea of a good god (free will doesn't cut it as an excuse when there are natural disasters, X% of pregnancies resulting in miscarriages, etc.) but Kevin pretty much summed up why hell is the absolute most damning (pun intended) charge against a good god. Also consider the goodness of a god who is silent when someone, in their most desperate moment, pleads with them for a response or a sign.

Your continual refusal to see this as evidence against a god (not a deistic god who is either indifferent or possibly malignant) that is the convention of so much of society is just yet another symptom we see rife around here. And again, your shifting of the burden of proof is unbecoming. You're the one making the claim that your belief and interpretation are both true and accurate, and we're asking you to show us. Like one of the youtube guys I like listening to best, AronRa, says so succinctly, "If you can't show it, you don't know it." It's extremely arrogant to propose this is perfectly okay to believe in when there is zero justification for it.

What I would advise is study science. Learn all the stuff that would blow your mind wide open in ways the bible couldn't even remotely come close to (and would look like toilet paper by comparison; not that it's much better than that anyway). If you still feel the need to cram god into those tiny gaps in our growing knowledge, by all means, do so, just realize that's a reprehensibly dishonest thing to do and merits no respect or tolerance if it interferes with actual success in experiments and discovery.

If you were to psychoanalyze the character(s) of god and jeebus in that book, it would be a litany of disorders and diagnoses that would probably crack anyone trying to do the most in-depth analysis possible. There is no intellectual or moral high ground to be had coming from the source of that faith and to pretend otherwise in this day and age should come with fraud charges. I'm relieved to hear you're questioning it in a more critical way than almost anyone else I've seen on here still mired in faith, but it still seems like you're going to reach the least reasonable, wrong conclusion just because it's poisoned your mind so thoroughly that the amount of antidote needed is insufficiently provided yet.

(September 26, 2017 at 2:30 am)beepete Wrote:

Moderator Notice
Link removed for violation of 30/30 rule

You can link videos so the video actually shows up in the post rather than linking to it. Also it would be polite to at least describe what it is you're substituting for your own words.