God and the dilemma with unfalsifiability

[Drich]

[quote='Drich' pid='1620538' dateline='1505478823']
i have, and concluded that infact he is the bad guy, and I am good with that. Why?
I forgot the book, but it basically took the star wars story and told it from the imperial side. A galaxy where law and order reigned, where everyone was fed, no sickness no, one left behind everyone had equal access and an equal duty to support soceity. But the terrorist rebels who were comprised of drug smugglers, religious fanatics, and anarchists wage their holy war against the established government. and acts like the death star destruction were compared to 9/11 and pearl harbor type attacks..

You've sourced a theologically important conclusion.......from star wars fan fiction.  

The point is that "good/morality" is subjective. God no matter how good is someone's Satan and vise versa.

In the end terms like 'good guy/bad guy' have very little meaning as all is subjective. when you do not have absolutes.

You can't exhale a single breath without hedging when you start talking god, can you?

The star wars example in of it self had nothing to do with God. the author drew no paralells between God and evil. It simple showed perspective and how it changes when viewed through the lens of one form of indoctrination or the other.

aaaaand we segue from star wars fanfic, to taliban sympathizing....for christ.....

Likewise God can be call evil but again.. look who is calling God evil.(those who do not want to follow God's laws.)

What, do you imagine, is the logical conclusion of this appeal to hypocrisy?

That "morality" is subjective to indoctrination. To which All have been indoctrinated by some type of societal influence. So rather than judge the deity in this case judge the societal influence/indoctrination.

---

Drich, if you saw two bears charge out from the trees and attack a group of people, and you had a gun, would you try to save the people? Or would you think it was "God's" will and not get involved?

It depends on the laws and who those people were.

Two strangers and the law allowed it I would help them..

It Kim jong un and Putin were the two guys being eaten... might lean towards will of God..

---

This is why, when you get down to it, no one is a true Xtian/whatever. You have to pick a yes/no answer to EVERYTHING and always have a good, solid reason to justify it in either direction. So when the word is so inconsistent as to render this bullshit idea of absolutes completely moot, you just look like an asshole trying to argue otherwise. But then that's not even necessary for a prick like Dripschit, he seems to excel at it without needing to appeal to the bible.

As for Gullible Cretin suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect, it's actually schizophrenia in his case, so it's far worse.

Here's the thing about Christianity most of you simply do not understand. Christ dying on the cross makes it ok not to be a yes or a no on everything. When Christ died for us the bar that each person know a yes or n to everything was removed. Now the standard is come with all that you can understand. what you get wrong will be forgiven what you don't understand will be filled in. There is no set standard anymore just do you absolute best.