(August 7, 2018 at 4:48 pm)SteveII Wrote: Whoa. Why do you dwell on only the negatives of existence?
I think you misunderstand me. I’m not complaining about pain we experience during life. I’m saying that according to the narrative, god created living creatures with the capacity to suffer, having full knowledge that he would be condemning a great deal of these creatures to eternal suffering, not because they have caused suffering to their fellow creatures, but simply for having doubts about His existence. He executed this plan not because he had to; not because he needed us; but because he wanted to. That is narcissism of a monstrous order. If any human treated another human, or even an animal in this way, society would label them at the very least apathetic to suffering, and at the very worst, a sociopath.
Quote:God does not need us.
Which makes his decision all the more horrific, and not in line with any being capable of experiencing empathy.
Quote:I think you are getting hung up on a misunderstanding of what it means to "Glorify God". Glorifying God involves having the fullest possible existence--which includes a relationship with him.Part of this is to understand the differences between an eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, all-loving God and ourselves (which is pretty much the opposite). This rightly results in an awe of God and a desire to worship him as a being worthy of worship.
I’m sorry, but none of the above clears anything up for me. My understanding from the passages you provided, from what you have explained, and from the definition of the word, ‘glorify’, is that god made people so he could be praised and worshipped. I don’t see how an ego-driven lust for worship is moral justification for causing a feeling creature eternal suffering. I can’t even justify this idea as a “relationship” in the colloquial sense of the word. What is the relationship between a man who tells another man or woman, ‘dedicate your entire being to me or I will torture you endlessly’?
Quote:We are not "pets". That is entirely too simplistic and shows a total lack of understanding the point which I am trying (imperfectly) to articulate.
I am definitely not understanding, I’m sorry.
Quote:God knows exactly how many will reject whatever truth he has made know to them.
I know of no objective evidence, or reason that exists which would indicate any kind of “truth” having been shown to me. This whole idea of, ‘you’ve been shown the truth; you just don’t want to see it,’ seems to me an ad hoc hypothesis Christians have come up with to explain why some people remain unconvinced, despite the Bible asserting everyone gets a fair shake.
Quote:It does not logically follow that no one should exist. At its root, this is an emotional response, not an argument.
My argument isn’t, “no one should exist.” My argument is that god’s motives, actions, and reasons for his actions; in combination with his foreknowledge; are not in line with a loving, empathetic being who cares about the well-being of others.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.