Better reasons to quit Christianity

[spockrates]

Isn't this the basis for your ruse? Omnipotence has a definition. Who are you to redefine it to conform to your god's characteristics? Why not just admit that your god is not omnipotent?

Hey, Cato. I'm saying it is possible we are misunderstanding what omnipotence is when the definition we give it makes no rational sense. How is it possible for anyone, no matter how powerful, to do something logically absurd? If you were omnipotent, could you make a perfectly round circle that had right angles? If the answer is, "No, of course not!" then I think we need to reconsider whether we are misunderstanding what omnipotence is. If the answer is, "Yes, nothing would be impossible for me to do if I were omnipotent!" then you have to demonstrate how a perfect circle could have right angles. If we cannot imagine something, because it is utterly ridiculous, then isn't our suggestion of what omnipotence is utterly ridiculous? As the ex-atheist C.S. Lewis wrote in Mere Christianity, omnipotence is not the power to accomplish the absurd.

I'm thinking that if you say omnipotence is the power to do any illogical and absolutely nonsensical thing, then I'd have to admit that the Christian concept of God is one that is not omnipotent, but has power of a different kind. But what do you think, my friend? Is your opinion that the fact that God cannot accomplish the absurd is proof that a Christian concept of a God (who is powerful enough to accomplish anything that is not absurd) is faulty?

For me, personally, if I'm going to reject the idea of God, I want to be intellectually honest about it. I want to reject the concept Christians have that makes the most rational sense, not some misconception of God and his attributes that is nonsense. Otherwise Christians, when I explain why I no longer believe in God will mock me and say, "You idiot! You haven't rejected the real God, but only your feeble misconception of him!" See from where I'm coming?

---

I would say that your answer falls under one (or perhaps all three) of these categories. Wouldn't you?

---

Hey all:

I think I've responded to everyone. Please let me know if I missed one of your posts. When you have the time, I'd like to know what you think of my responses.

---

I should amend my previous statement. The answers given so far fall under four main categories:

1. There's no reason to restrict my behavior
2. There is no God
3. There is no soul that survives the body after death, and so, no judgement for one's behavior
4. The Bible is not a reliable, historical document

Hi again spockrates.

What I think of your responses is that you have your mind made and nothing anyone says will change it. I posted a couple of threads about direct contradictions which most here seem to be afraid to deal with.

Atheists don't want to deal with them because they show God is not as bad as they claim the Bible shows. Christians don't want to deal with them because it goes against the "infallible" theory.

Anyways, my reason falls under none of your above reasons.

Basically, here's my reason.

Bringing about the "New Coveneant" as described in the Bible would mean there will be no more disagreements. Everyone will know God, everyone will stop being dickheads and trying to force their beliefs on others. When a person has "God's Law" written on their hearts, there will be no need to restrict your behavior as it would be righteous.

I think the Bible is very reliable.
When it says the scribes lied, I believe it.
When it says the prophets lied, I believe it.
When it says people have oppressed their neighbors, I believe it.

In which discussion thread of yours have I not participated catfish? I'd be happy to do so, just let me know.

What do you think I've made up my mind about? Please be more specific.