I am an atheist

  • Thread starter Thread starter _A
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

If someone’s dog mauls children and attacks and kills other people’s pets would you have a problem with destroying the dog?
 
_A_

If someone’s dog mauls children and attacks and kills other people’s pets would you have a problem with destroying the dog?
Yes.
I like dogs. I would do it, but it would be reluctantly.
 
I think the LDS tradtion of having young people go on missions is an excellent one. What dedication for the family to send a teen away from home and financially support that child for a year to two years on top of the cost of college. They must worry so to have their child approaching strangers day in and day out.

What courage in the child to leave home and spend each day knocking on the doors of strangers explaining the LDS beliefs. Missionaries risk ridicule, threats and just plain crazies.

The LDS dedication in developing, expanding and maintaining geneologies has been a major contribution to society. It is one place that African Americans can go to trace their ancestry back to sections of Africa.

Lot’s of good things about LDS.
Thank you for your kind words. I agree. There are many good things about LDS, that even non-LDS can appreciate and benefit from.

zerinus
 
No, whoever makes a claim such as ‘my god exists’ holds the ‘burden of proof’.
Not at all. That proof comes from God, not us. We tell them what they need to do to obtain that witness directly from God; and may will testify to you that such a witness they have received.
Lots of folks will accept what you say without proof, of course.
We are not asking them to. We show them what they need to do to obtain that witness from God Himself, and they do.

If you don’t want to apply that test, and would rather be an atheist, OK, you have that choice. What do you want us to do about it?

zerinus
 
Thank you, but I did already.
n Ezekiel 26:7-12, it is made clear that Nebuchadrezzar would be the one grinding Tyre to dust and looting the city.

26:7 For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people.
26:8 He shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field: and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee.
26:9 And he shall set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers.
26:10 By reason of the abundance of his horses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach.
26:11 With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground.
26:12 And they shall make a spoil of thy riches, and make a prey of thy merchandise: and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy pleasant houses: and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water.
I don’t understand your objection. Please elaborate.
 
Los Angeles, California will be dumped into the sea so that nothing, not even the dirt of its streets, will be left on dry land.

If someone in a few hundred years finds this and notices that it has come true, does that make me a prophet or did I just make a lucky guess? If it’s thousands of years before it happens, I will have even more notoriety as a prophet. Or not.
I believe that the likelihood of an earthquake causing this to happen is greater than the likelihood of someone bulldozing (i.e., scraping, as Ezekiel wrote about Tyre) the remains of Los Angeles into the ocean after an earthquake.
 
Not at all. That proof comes from God, not us. We tell them what they need to do to obtain that witness directly from God; and may will testify to you that such a witness they have received.

We are not asking them to. We show them what they need to do to obtain that witness from God Himself, and they do.

If you don’t want to apply that test, and would rather be an atheist, OK, you have that choice. What do you want us to do about it?

zerinus
I think you misunderstand me. I am here for several reasons. The main one that drew me here was that I would like to understand this ‘belief’. See if it is based in fact, and not in anything like self-hypnosis. Also, I enjoy debate (though I am still learning…not that good at it yet). Another is that I enjoy chatting to people.
I am not trying to find a god to worship.
I would try your test, but whenever I fail such a test (such as the ‘pray for knowledge’ test, which has failed me in the past) the tester blames me. Nothing specific, either. Just says that I am not ready.
If you have a test, make it independantly verifiable, and lab-testable. Otherwise, it is more ‘personal witness’ experience (most likely) and not something I haven’t seen before.
 
_A_

If someone’s dog mauls children and attacks and kills other people’s pets would you have a problem with destroying the dog?
Yes.
I like dogs. I would do it, but it would be reluctantly.
I think that most of us would do what was necessary. Likewise, we would destroy a pack of wild dogs as well. There are many more examples that you and I could agree upon when it comes to such things.

With that in mind please be advised that God has complete control over his creation and that He holds exclusive rights to do with it as He pleases. This includes the accomplishment of his divine plan and satisfying His perfect justice.

The distance between us and a dog is relatively small compared with the distance between us and our Creator. You have no problem doing what is necessary in dealing with a vicious dog. You should, likewise, have no problem seeing why God did what was necessary in the OT in dealing with the vicious and debased societies that warred against the chosen people.

I think that you should think about this a little bit. There is absolutely no reason for you to refer to God as genocidal. What you perceive as brutal genocide is clearly misplaced.
 
I think that most of us would do what was necessary. Likewise, we would destroy a pack of wild dogs as well. There are many more examples that you and I could agree upon when it comes to such things.

With that in mind please be advised that God has complete control over his creation and that He holds exclusive rights to do with it as He pleases. This includes the accomplishment of his divine plan and satisfying His perfect justice.

The distance between us and a dog is relatively small compared with the distance between us and our Creator. You have no problem doing what is necessary in dealing with a vicious dog. You should, likewise, have no problem seeing why God did what was necessary in the OT in dealing with the vicious and debased societies that warred against the chosen people.

I think that you should think about this a little bit. There is absolutely no reason for you to refer to God as genocidal. What you perceive as brutal genocide is clearly misplaced.
I think you are suggesting that Yahweh has no better answer at his disposal than to have his people killed. He doesn’t just quietly and quickly snuff them out - he torments and tortures them - sometimes for eternity.
You were saying why I should worship him?

You know, a pig farmer does what you are suggesting. Raises a bunch of animals and then kills them for his own purposes. It that the worship-worthy part? The pig farmer is quite humane, generally, by the way.
 
The distance between us and a dog is relatively small compared with the distance between us and our Creator. You have no problem doing what is necessary in dealing with a vicious dog. You should, likewise, have no problem seeing why God did what was necessary in the OT in dealing with the vicious and debased societies that warred against the chosen people.

I think that you should think about this a little bit. There is absolutely no reason for you to refer to God as genocidal. What you perceive as brutal genocide is clearly misplaced.
We are very close to dogs in many ways. Most medical research has been done on dogs because of this commonality. The God you worship is omnipotent and omniscient. As such this Being has the ability to control without killing. All things are possible for this Being.

The fact that the God of the OT chose genocide and the unbelievable cruelty of drowning almost all living creatures on the earth in a great flood, indicates to me that this Being is not worthy of respect let alone worship.

Now if you want to say that the OT was part history and part metaphor; that your God is Jesus Christ and not a homicidal maniac, then that is a concept that I respect. I can understand the worship of the gentle Jesus who loved all, even the sinner.
 
We are very close to dogs in many ways. Most medical research has been done on dogs because of this commonality. The God you worship is omnipotent and omniscient. As such this Being has the ability to control without killing. All things are possible for this Being.

The fact that the God of the OT chose genocide and the unbelievable cruelty of drowning almost all living creatures on the earth in a great flood, indicates to me that this Being is not worthy of respect let alone worship.

Now if you want to say that the OT was part history and part metaphor; that your God is Jesus Christ and not a homicidal maniac, then that is a concept that I respect. I can understand the worship of the gentle Jesus who loved all, even the sinner.
As I am led to understand the story, Yahweh and Jesus are the same being (along with another character who is vague).
Isn’t worshipping one worshipping both? Doesn’t the bible claim that Jesus said he supported all the OT?
I really don’t understand the difference that your language suggests.
 
As I am led to understand the story, Yahweh and Jesus are the same being (along with another character who is vague).
Isn’t worshipping one worshipping both? Doesn’t the bible claim that Jesus said he supported all the OT?
I really don’t understand the difference that your language suggests.
I am suggesting that the Old Testament does not truly depict the gentle God that is Jesus. I suggest that the OT is partially a history of the Hebrew people, part religious observance, and part religious metaphor.

If one interprets the Old Testament as being literally true, then a believer is faced with a cruel, capricious god of the Old Testament being the same as the gentle, loving God of the New Testament. Now that seems to indicate that God changed in some dramatic way between the Flood and the Crucifixion. Certainly humans have not changed from the stories of the Old Testament and what is happening in the world today.

As a metaphor, the Old Testament talks of a cruel, jealous, and capricious God because that is all that humans at that time and place could imagine. The Gods of the Egyptians, Assyrians, and other Mediterranean peoples were equally cruel. That is the only way that the civilization at that time and place understood things. Humans talk about their Gods in a way they understand.

Just some thoughts from an non-Theist.
 
Where to even start…hmmm…
OK we live in a world which has a spin. This spin is very regular, and makes a light/dark cycle. Because it spins at a steady rate, which it must, it makes a symmetrical light/dark cycle because we are orbiting a star. That explains a lot of symmetry. Also, some kindly sort earlier mentioned that eyes develop on both sides in most creatures because that is the most survivable layout for a two-eyed creature.
You even strengthen my point by moving out into the planets. Our own Planet Earth displays a magnificent balance with the sun and the moon. This balance points toward an intelligent designer, beyond our world.
I still contend that to see all these designs in nature and in the universe and insist that no designer was present in the creation of these very same things is not a logical conculsion.
At this point, you either see a connection to something beyond mankind or not. I see it. You don’t. So, we’ll just leave it at that.
 
I am suggesting that the Old Testament does not truly depict the gentle God that is Jesus. I suggest that the OT is partially a history of the Hebrew people, part religious observance, and part religious metaphor.

If one interprets the Old Testament as being literally true, then a believer is faced with a cruel, capricious god of the Old Testament being the same as the gentle, loving God of the New Testament. Now that seems to indicate that God changed in some dramatic way between the Flood and the Crucifixion. Certainly humans have not changed from the stories of the Old Testament and what is happening in the world today.

As a metaphor, the Old Testament talks of a cruel, jealous, and capricious God because that is all that humans at that time and place could imagine. The Gods of the Egyptians, Assyrians, and other Mediterranean peoples were equally cruel. That is the only way that the civilization at that time and place understood things. Humans talk about their Gods in a way they understand.

Just some thoughts from an non-Theist.
I don’t see Jesus as being that different from Yahweh. I read the stuff. They both use terror and torture, Yahweh in the immediate, Jesus in the afterlife (and eternally) Both are threatening and promising horrors to all who disobey. Both are claimed to be one. How cruel is the god of the NT? (Jesus) I would have to say his cruelty can be measured by the length of time it goes on (how long does hell go on?)
 
We are very close to dogs in many ways. Most medical research has been done on dogs because of this commonality. The God you worship is omnipotent and omniscient. As such this Being has the ability to control without killing. All things are possible for this Being.

The fact that the God of the OT chose genocide and the unbelievable cruelty of drowning almost all living creatures on the earth in a great flood, indicates to me that this Being is not worthy of respect let alone worship.

Now if you want to say that the OT was part history and part metaphor; that your God is Jesus Christ and not a homicidal maniac, then that is a concept that I respect. I can understand the worship of the gentle Jesus who loved all, even the sinner.
If God did not have total dominion over his creation and could not do with it as He pleased then He would not be God. We are not in a position to judge God. That having been said I would like you to consider the following:

The pagan people’s that lived in ancient history were extremely course and primitive. They worhipped things made by their own hands, or animals, or other things of nature. Some of them, such as Pharoah and others, set themselves up as gods. Sacrifices on the part of pagans were incredibly cruel, ungodly, and debased. It is difficult for modern man to fathom just how bad some of these things were.

The evil and sinfullness associated with pagan practices and beliefs are antithetical to God and truth. Pagan practices could not be easily overcome. God gave pagan peoples plenty of opportunity. Moreover, He gave them the example of the chosen people. In some cases pagans converted to Judaism, but most by choice remained steeped in the darkness of their evil ways.

Even the chosen people would fall back into pagan worship. The only thing that many of these peoples understood was power. They believed that their pagan gods would lead them in battle to conquer their neighbors. They were ruthless and unmerciful in dealing with their neighbors. They could only be convinced by the utter defeat of both their armies and their pagan gods.

You seem to think that God could have dealt with them differently. This might be true, but it is an assumption that should not be made. No one can counsel the Creator, and no one can know what He knows. Our wisdom is like straw in comparison. We can only attempt to understand. It could be that if God had done things differently, then the gift of free will may have have been compromised or destroyed. The gift of free will is part of our humanity. It is also abundantly clear that man has exercised free will for good and for evil.

You would not feel the least bit guilty about destroying a nest of killer bees, a nest of termites destroying your house, or defending your family against a pack of wild dogs. The killer bees, the termites, and the wild dogs have no rights and have no say so over how you might choose to dispose of them. If they had the ability to think as you do, they may not think that your methods were proper or merciful even though you do.

Finally, please be aware that you cannot apply your personal human standards in dealing with other human beings, be they right or wrong, to the Creator. You cannot logically do this any more than a termite can apply its standards to you.

Likewise, you cannot think of ancient societies based on your modern day western societal norms. Most of us have little or no personal experience with the horrible things that some men perpetrate against others.

I hope this is begins to help at least a little.
 
Sorry if it is rude to quote myself, but…
You begin with the assertion that everything is designed. That colours your vision, I think. For example, if I show you some naturally formed crystals…
http://z.about.com/d/chemistry/1/7/e/P/coppersulfate.jpg
You may discard my example by saying that your god made it that way.
Exactly as I predicted here, don’t you think?. Can you not see that you are excluding **any **evidence with this outlook?
The more you know about how crystals are produced, the less you need god as an explanation. The same goes for cosmology, or evolution by natural selection. I know of some great lay persons learning materials. Feel free to PM me for some, if you like.
 
If God did not have total dominion over his creation and could not do with it as He pleased then He would not be God.
Would you please define some of these terms you used? I think we very nearly have a falsifiable statement here! That’s really quite exciting.

Definitions required (as far as I can tell - feel free to contribute)
-total dominion
-creation
We may need more, but that should get us started. The better the definitions are, the better, of course.
 
If God did not have total dominion over his creation and could not do with it as He pleased then He would not be God. We are not in a position to judge God. That having been said I would like you to consider the following:

You seem to think that God could have dealt with them differently. This might be true, but it is an assumption that should not be made. No one can counsel the Creator, and no one can know what He knows. Our wisdom is like straw in comparison. We can only attempt to understand. It could be that if God had done things differently, then the gift of free will may have have been compromised or destroyed. The gift of free will is part of our humanity. It is also abundantly clear that man has exercised free will for good and for evil.

You would not feel the least bit guilty about destroying a nest of killer bees, a nest of termites destroying your house, or defending your family against a pack of wild dogs. The killer bees, the termites, and the wild dogs have no rights and have no say so over how you might choose to dispose of them. If they had the ability to think as you do, they may not think that your methods were proper or merciful even though you do.

Finally, please be aware that you cannot apply your personal human standards in dealing with other human beings, be they right or wrong, to the Creator. You cannot logically do this any more than a termite can apply its standards to you.

Likewise, you cannot think of ancient societies based on your modern day western societal norms. Most of us have little or no personal experience with the horrible things that some men perpetrate against others.

I hope this is begins to help at least a little.
First of all, God was not defending himself or his home when he caused the Flood. The Flood killed the innocent animals and other creatures as well as the supposedly guilty humans. Not exactly fair, now is it?

One has to twist and turn and take a position of ignorance in order to worship the God of the Old Testament.

Thank you for your wishes of help. 🙂
 
You begin with the assertion that everything is designed. That colours your vision, I think. For example, if I show you some naturally formed crystals…
http://z.about.com/d/chemistry/1/7/e/P/coppersulfate.jpg
You may discard my example by saying that your god made it that way.
I don’t disregard your example, at all. But, I still see a beauty and a balance in that crystal. It doesn’t all have to be right angles. The overall effect can also point to something beyond itself. For example, step back and listen to the sounds of nature. These sounds blend together into something beyond each single critter, like nature’s orchestra. I love the sound.

My contention is that a creator has put the laws of nature, physics, etc. into effect. The demonstration of this beauty and balance is one way to use our natural reason to determine the existence of something beyond ourselves. This can’t be debated because it is each person’s personal experience. The natural beauty in life moves my heart and mind in a way where I can see beyond myself. If the opposite is true for you, I can’t debate that. It’s not true for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top