Kudos to our theist members

[Bad Writer]

Just because GC believes in an evil god (and I also believe this god is evil) doesn't make the believer evil. Because I believe in the sun, that it's hot, provides warmth, and is a massive ball of gas, this does not necessarily put those attributes on me. I am not hot. I do not provide the same kind of warmth...though a big ball of gas is debatable (har har).

Those are my two or three cents on that one.

I wouldn't say so if it was merely on the basis of the God he believes in. It really has more to do with the fact that he justifies God's evil actions and calls them good. Most Christians never think about it enough to even consider.

So you're equating him to Johnny Cochrane getting OJ Simpson off the hook. Okay, I can get on board with that.

[Raven]

GC said:The reason you see God's actions as evil is because you do not accept His sovereignty, until you do your post about Him will be dismissed as sightless nonsense, and this is on you.

Evil actions do not stop being evil irregardless of who might be the perp.
Sovereignty does not have jack shit to do with it. You have some seriously warped notions, dude.

[Something completely different]

The reason I do not accept the sovereignty of those men is one simple thing, like Nietzsche their dead and have come under the sovereign judgement of God.

And like your god or the islamic god or national socialism, fascism and communism - they are politicaly motivated movements and I could have simply replaced the names with the terms asociated with those ideologies. Of course you will insist that yours is still right because of yur bronze age book of myths.
But you are essentialy not any different from a fascist or communist, blindly following the doctrin you are beeing fed by your priests and probably ready do cook up justifications for crimes when they are commited in the name of your religion. And it is this attitude which is why we cant have nice things.

And what the fuck is "god`s sovereignty"!!! Your space daddy is not a country!

[Godscreated]

The reason I do not accept the sovereignty of those men is one simple thing, like Nietzsche their dead and have come under the sovereign judgement of God.

And like your god or the islamic god or national socialism, fascism and communism - they are politicaly motivated movements and I could have simply replaced the names with the terms asociated with those ideologies. Of course you will insist that yours is still right because of yur bronze age book of myths.
But you are essentialy not any different from a fascist or communist, blindly following the doctrin you are beeing fed by your priests and probably ready do cook up justifications for crimes when they are commited in the name of your religion. And it is this attitude which is why we cant have nice things.

And what the fuck is "god`s sovereignty"!!! Your space daddy is not a country!

Whither you accept it or not there are many different governments in this world and none of them are sovereign. Sovereignty belongs to the King of the Universe, that being God the creator of all things.
Yep, you could have added the names of many people ideas or what not, yet they all pale in the sovereignty of God, the God who will judge all.

---

GC said:The reason you see God's actions as evil is because you do not accept His sovereignty, until you do your post about Him will be dismissed as sightless nonsense, and this is on you.

Evil actions do not stop being evil irregardless of who might be the perp.
Sovereignty does not have jack shit to do with it. You have some seriously warped notions, dude.

Evil can not come from the perfect God of love.

[Polaris]

And Hindus too... I must admit I'm almost entirely ignorant of Hinduism, aside from knowing they have a pantheon of deities, believe in reincarnation, and cows are sacred.

As am I, which is why when I think of religious freedom, they are first to come to mind since I see they have the most to lose in a Western society.

I've never understood their religion from a personal point of view, which mostly stems from my views of reincarnation being a form of living hell.

[Ryantology]

Show me an unsupportable one that I've made Ryan.

Oh boy. You might as well have dropped me off at a liquor store and dared me to come out with just one thing alcoholic. What a gold mine, and this was from less than half a dozen threads. I could save time just linking to your post history, but here's a select few. Take care to note how many times you make positive assertions regarding the existence of God and his attributes

I only assert what is provable.

Then you can start by proving all of these:

1. God wouldn't send a dog to hell for doing what comes naturally, because the dog doesn't choose it.
   
2. Fate is nature.
   
3. God is a logical God.
   
4. God loves you without that love being reciprocated
   
5. His point in creating us was to replicate himself.
   
6. What religion does is reflect reality.
   
7. Your solution to the problem of evil is an unworkable fantasy.
   
8. There is only good. There are not several (fully) goods.
   
9. Creator and goodness are inextricably linked.
   
10. A first cause has to be fully potential. What is purely potential is also purely good.
    
11. The creative spark wouldn't be a creative spark of there existed in it a destructive spark.
    
12. Goodness isn't a property of God. God -is- goodness.
    
13. Murder and rape aren't what God commanded.
    
14. 'A' god might be created. But 'the' god, the first cause, cannot.
    
15. To create, god has to be a positive force.
    
16. A negative force cannot create.
    
17. A god cannot be created or it is not god. So a god must be timeless.
    
18. A positive, originating force has to also be good, as good entails this
    
19. We understand Gods morality because we have a sense of ethical correctness which we apply selfishly. Humans can appreciate the reason for justice.
    
20. The bible is written about a good god.
    
21. To say that the bible is evidence of the opposite is to say that the authors wrote the opposite of what they understood.
    
22. But what you're failing to address here, is the fact that God knows exactly what the person is thinking, and how their whole life pans out. Exactly what they will do in the future.
    
23. He knows enough to judge fairly if that life deserves to continue.
    
24. It is a Christian principle that everyone has the potential to change their minds. That can't apply to God. He does know.
    
25. God is just
    
26. The bible has nothing immoral in it committed by God
    
27. Does that secular morality apply to God? No. His knowledge is not limited.
    
28. Only God can know and fairly judge.
    
29. The choices are not made for you. They were always only your choices. You were not forced to make them.
    
30. God knows the history of the universe from beginning to end.
    
31. He is not bound by linear time.
    
32. He knows what decisions you made, but he had no part in influencing those decisions. Those were fully yours to make.
    
33. God knows the future so you, who do not, don't have free will?
    
34. You omit the fact that God would judge the whole life of the child and it's potential descendants.
    
35. Only God can know if that future is innocent or guilty, and is the only one who can exact justice.
    
36. God served justice.
    
37. Please show how you arrive at murder and crimes. None are there in the original.
    
38. Please explain how you, like God, are omniscient.
    
39. Other gods = not gods.
    
40. To you, who doesn't get that God being good underpins morality, the "10Cs" make no sense.
    
41. Can we say that genocide is always unjustifiable? No.
    
42. My beliefs are entirely logically based.
    
43. The bible DOESN'T say that God got things wrong.
    
44. Yet God cannot be wrong in his judgements, which is the angle the bible takes, as that would be illogical.
    
45. We can understand something of God through logical deduction.
    
46. Ultimate Morality isn't knowable to any being that isn't all knowing.
    
47. God doesn't "decide" what is moral. God is perfectly moral. That is what divine goodness is.
    
48. God forces nothing, or you wouldn't have the choice to act immorally.
    
49. Hell is the immediate just reward for immorality.
    
50. Perfect morality is a goal all people can aspire to.
    
51. Everything you're using to put down theistic morality is human abuse of that theism.
    
52. God, being all knowing, is in a position to make that call.
    
53. If God is love and wants to love us, then he has to let evil exist to give us the freedom to choose love.
    
54. This physical reality is ethically neutral (at best). God is the positive force. What detracts from god is anti god.
    
55. As we deduce that God must be just (by constructing a coherent model) then God can be no other. What isn't just cannot be God.
    
56. Gods purpose is to provide a choice.
    
57. God being just enacts justice.
    
58. Where God is just, we have to understand his actions to be just.
    
59. God knows the future, so he knew those lives and could judge fairly at what point justice needed to be served.
    
60. Morality with God wins hands down.
    

To close, one last quote from you:

So here we are again, waiting for these inspired claims to be substantiated. Meanwhile, we must assume their falsity.

Thanks for making it easy.

Oh, here's a bonus contradiction:

God knows the future so you, who do not, don't have free will?

There is no such thing as free will. We act as we're biologically programmed to do.

Thus putting on display the lie that we are being judged by a just god.

[fr0d0]

lol

All of those things I can and have supported with logic Ryan. All the list shows is that you don't understand much. I know you interject with silly points, logically bankrupt points, all of the time. I wonder why you don't ask about these things you don't understand.

Let's take the jewel in your crown:

Someone else described our free agency as free will. So I used their terminology to ask a question, which demonstrated the problem with their logic.
Namely: how can one perspective which you cannot possess affect your perspective which is ignorant of theirs.
The actual conversation goes on to explain further.

As I mentioned, free will is a misnomer. There is only actually free agency. A point first introduced to me by an atheist here, and fleshed out many times by me since.
You can't make choices that go against your influences and instincts. How you react at every moment is dictated by your past. Think about it.

What freedom you do have is to act as your will dictates. You are a free agent, imprisonment etc not withstanding.

Want to explore it further? Ask a question about it.

There is certainly no contradiction, as with every other point in your list (not including misquotes. eg : 39. Other gods = not gods. What I said: Other gods = not God. ie. other gods are not -the- Christian God (denoted by the Capitalisation) ). Unless you can explain it, as I always at least attempt to when I make objections. I give reason that I can back up.

You saying "the bible is in fact saying the opposite of what it reads" and never ever supporting that except to make more unsupported claims, like "genocide is always bad". "But it is" seems to be your best argument. A stone wall argument in your head! But you can't explain it. Resorting to insult reveals your frustration at your inability.

"God is bad" you then assert on top of your empty proof.

[Ryantology]

lol

All of those things I can and have supported with logic Ryan.

Logic you have never substantiated by showing that it has a basis in anything factual. Assertions based on other assertions. Intellectual Monopoly money.

You saying "the bible is in fact saying the opposite of what it reads" and never ever supporting that except to make more unsupported claims, like "genocide is always bad". "But it is" seems to be your best argument. A stone wall argument in your head! But you can't explain it. Resorting to insult reveals your frustration at your inability.

I keep asking you and other Christians to explain a situation for which genocide is the only workable solution, or one in which it is to be praised outright. Not one of you has stepped up. Your only justification is "God said so". I can only assume this is because we both understand there is none. You have the chance to show me otherwise, right here.

As for the Bible saying other than what it reads, we don't believe what the Bible says, and are therefore not forced to agree with the obvious bias inherent in the narrative. You're asserting that there are correct and incorrect ways to interpret the Bible, which is another assertion you can't justify.

[fr0d0]

By factual you of course mean hard evidence which as explained to you at length is logically impossible. You have to use your head for that one Ryan. If, as is true in the past, you refuse to address logic, then I am wasting my time talking with you further. We have no common ground.

---

I keep asking you and other Christians to explain a situation for which genocide is the only workable solution.

Nice dodge. Don't answer a question with another question. It's called deflection.

As has been explained to you, this isn't anything to do with the subject: that an all knowing being can judge fairly.

Your accusation rests on this being the act of a protagonist that can't know enough to judge fairly. Very simple.

[Ryantology]

By factual you of course mean hard evidence which as explained to you at length is logically impossible. You have to use your head for that one Ryan. If, as is true in the past, you refuse to address logic, then I am wasting my time talking with you further. We have no common ground.

Without a foundation of at least some hard evidence, your logic is in no way distinguishable from naked assertion. I refuse to address your logic because doing so requires me to accept your premises on faith with no good reason to do so.

Nice dodge. Don't answer a question with another question. It's called deflection.

I can think of no reason why it would not be bad. Literally, nothing. So, the ball is in your court. You told me to ask questions.

As has been explained to you, this isn't anything to do with the subject: that an all knowing being can judge fairly.

But doesn't prove that he does judge fairly. An all-knowing being can be capricious and malicious. Knowledge does not correlate with fairness.

Your accusation rests on this being the act of a protagonist that can't know enough to judge fairly. Very simple.

God hasn't proven to me that he knows everything.