This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

"You can't criticize God" Continued

#11Lord_IchmaelPosted 1/18/2013 11:52:41 AM
As is almost always the case, I concur with Jon. The Bible fails to demonstrate that God actually is perfect- claiming it and yet having God do tons of questionable things hardly supports that. I think what the Bible says He is doesn't matter as much as what it says He DOES. God seems more like a typical misogynistic in-group supremacist human of that time period rather than a perfect benevolent being, much like the Greek and Norse gods were very fallible and more like humans of those times. Saying "I'm perfect, don't question me" is something a dictator seeking to control you would say, not an actual perfect being. It would be self-evident for a real perfect being.

I now have the impression that the Old Testament was mostly just a way for its writers to invent reasons to justify Jews' superiority to other groups (that is NOT an anti-Semitic statement; back then and still for some people today EVERY group wanted to believe they were better than everyone else, and they would invent whatever reason they could to do so), and that's why the book and especially God is so self-contradicting.

this logically follows, and I have no problem admitting there's a couple passages that I have to throw my hands up in the air and say "God is good". Isaiah fifty five (MAN I NEED A NEW FIVE KEY LOL): 8 tells me that there's at least two thoughts, probably a lot more, that are impossible for me to figure out. But until I figure out which thoughts those are, I use the God is perfect mentality as personal motivation to delve deeper for an answer for skeptics. eh, this point was pretty irrelevant but I just wanted to share my two cents.


Sounds like denial to me...
#12Mike_StantonPosted 1/18/2013 12:07:44 PM(edited)
If God is omniscient then he would design things in a way that an omniscient being would. Things aren't designed as such, therefore no such being exists.

EDIT: Now please close this unneeded continuation of a topic that already went way too long.
---
RIP Butters_1188 2005-2009
Prove me wrong
#13OrangeWizardPosted 1/18/2013 12:10:15 PM
From: darkmaian23 | #003
Historically, it is known that the Gospels were written at least a century after the death of Jesus. They were not written by anyone who had actually met Jesus in person while he was on Earth. It is often said that God divinely inspired the writing of the four Gospels and that is why they are accurate.

But the accounts in the Gospels are not identical. The overall contents are the same but there a differences, which is inconsistent with the claim that God wrote the books through human hands, for if He did so, would they not agree on every point without deviation? Are we to think that God sent forth the spirits of the disciples of Jesus to write their own accounts through living hands, so that they might give an account of what they had seen and done as it related to Christ?

Or else how do you explain the differences? Again, I will grant that they are minor but they really shouldn't be there at all if the Bible is what it is claimed to be. Is God excellent and world building but not so good at keeping track of details?


Attacking the source is perfectly fine and valid.
However, you're not criticizing God, so this is off topic.

From: Thuggernautz | #005
So on the other side, looking at some Godly actions taken within the bible, we can judge those from a modern reasonable standpoint as being atrocious and incredibly malevolent and vindictive were they to be attributed to a non-omniscient, omnipotent being.


No you can't.From: charey | #004
God has lied before and admitted to it so God saying he is perfect isn't proof of perfection. So the only way to judge if he is perfect is to judge his actions.

"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:" ~2 Thessalonians 2:11-12


That's not what that verse means.
---
"Let's make this quick, I'm double-parked." - Two-face
#14JonWood007Posted 1/18/2013 12:11:53 PM

Christ suffered so in the journey to be Christlike we must suffer as well. Ot killings? As I've said multiple times if it was really God who killed them then death really isn't the end.


That's a rationalization, not a reason. There are still gaps there. If death isnt that bad why prohibit murder?

Heck, why create a world WITH pain?


James 1: five (lol five key is broke <_<) and yes, I HAVE found answers to questions I've prayed about the same day, sometimes same hour, record is five seconds (someone called me with the answer, could't make this up if I wanted to)


Hasnt been verified.


already demonstrated genocide. It's funny how you continue to bring up eternal hell? I remember one time we debated I told you that there's multiple theologies about Hell. You responded that it's all speculation anyways so it was pointless. But here you are, making an assumption about Hell that you yourself once called pointless and extrapolating it to your point in a debate. Personally, I'm not sure where I stand on Hell. A few verses make me think that we the opportunity to try and accept Jesus again post this life, but its vague. I'm absolutely positive, however, that once at the point of never gonna be with Christ you simply don't exist anymore (annihilationist theory, iirc) and I will back that up with plenty of Scripture, if anyone's curious.


Yes you did, but most other theories make little sense to me. Like...why would God need to pay a ransom to Satan? Doesn't make any sense.

Annhilationist makes sense, but not sure it's supported, other verses conflict it about the fire never ending the bosom of abraham and all.

this logically follows, and I have no problem admitting there's a couple passages that I have to throw my hands up in the air and say "God is good". Isaiah fifty five (MAN I NEED A NEW FIVE KEY LOL): 8 tells me that there's at least two thoughts, probably a lot more, that are impossible for me to figure out. But until I figure out which thoughts those are, I use the God is perfect mentality as personal motivation to delve deeper for an answer for skeptics. eh, this point was pretty irrelevant but I just wanted to share my two cents.


But....the thing is, is God REALLY perfect? Or are you rationalizing?
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | GTX 580 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#15darkmaian23Posted 1/18/2013 12:18:41 PM
Oogally posted...
darkmaian23 posted...
Historically, it is known that the Gospels were written at least a century after the death of Jesus.

Uh, no it isn't. John is the latest and clocks in at around 90-100.


Gospel of John: 90 - 100 AD
Gospel of Mark: 70 AD
Gospel of Matthew: 100140 AD
Gospel of Luke: 70 AD

I was attempting to make a generalization without getting bogged down in a lot of numbers. I suppose I should have said "around a century" instead of a "at least a century". But the point still stands.
#16OrangeWizardPosted 1/18/2013 12:23:52 PM
From: JonWood007 | #007
And this why I don't want to debate with you. You shove your assumptions down my throat and then tell me they're my idea to begin with when I tell you what's wrong with them. Go back to your cave, troll.


Do you deny that you are the one assuming that God is imperfect, when you attempt to criticize him based on his actions?

You've never denied this. You just whine about it.

I never assumed the Biblical god was perfect.


Oh, so you're cherry-picking?
Because right next to where it says "God is perfect" it says "God killed the Canaanites", something that you take issue with.

So if that line about God being perfect isn't true, then how can you say he killed the Canaanites? Aren't you throwing the entire source of your criticism into suspicion?

This is the trap you've stumbled into.
I predict you'll whine about it, rather than actual argue against the logic.

Speaking of which, let's talk about Einstein for a second, and scholars in general. Einstein was not smart because he said "I'm better than math at you, don't question me." He was smart because he did math academically. Let's talk about what this entails. You know, when you get your PHD blah blah blah blah blah blah blah


Missing the point.

You said that my analogies to the attributes that define Zeus and FSM, and thus, need to be present, are only fictional characters, and my logic doesn't apply to the real world.

I just showed you that it did.


From: JonWood007 | #008
As for needing to accept all assumptions in the Bible....they contradict one another.


If you can find an actual contradiction, then great, my logical trap no longer applies.

However, "Because I disagree with the way he did this" is not an actual contradiction.

Remember, a true perfect being would be able to answer all criticism accordingly.


And he can.
Just because he doesn't appear in your room and answer all of his questions doesn't mean he can't.
Just like it doesn't mean that there aren't any aliens just because we haven't seen them yet.
---
"Let's make this quick, I'm double-parked." - Two-face
#17OrangeWizardPosted 1/18/2013 12:28:25 PM
From: Lord_Ichmael | #011
The Bible fails to demonstrate that God actually is perfect- claiming it and yet having God do tons of questionable things hardly supports that.


So if the claim that "God isn't perfect" isn't true, what makes all of those "questionable things" that God did true?
What if he never did those "questionable things", and that passage in the bible is as made-up as "God is perfect"?

This is why you can't criticize God. You shoot yourself in the foot by damaging the validity of your own source.
X cannot be both true and untrue.
Principle of non-contradiction.
---
"Let's make this quick, I'm double-parked." - Two-face
#18Lord_IchmaelPosted 1/18/2013 12:39:43 PM
OrangeWizard posted...
From: Lord_Ichmael | #011
The Bible fails to demonstrate that God actually is perfect- claiming it and yet having God do tons of questionable things hardly supports that.


So if the claim that "God isn't perfect" isn't true, what makes all of those "questionable things" that God did true?
What if he never did those "questionable things", and that passage in the bible is as made-up as "God is perfect"?

This is why you can't criticize God. You shoot yourself in the foot by damaging the validity of your own source.
X cannot be both true and untrue.
Principle of non-contradiction.


Indeed, which is partly why I think the Bible isn't a valid source of information at all- it contradicts itself too much. I'm just speaking in the context of evaluating what it says within itself.
#19JonWood007Posted 1/18/2013 1:04:58 PM
Do you deny that you are the one assuming that God is imperfect, when you attempt to criticize him based on his actions?


I'm beginning not holding any position really, but assuming imperfection for the main reason of perfection is a major claim, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Now, If God does bad things, and there's no reasonable explanation to account for them, then the god you speak of CLEARLY is not perfect.

Heck, I wanted to get this earlier in responding to dark, but I was in a hurry and didn't get to it.

Defending the god of the Bible as perfect is like a battered woman defending her abuser. She loves him, he loves her (or so they say), and it isn't really his fault for him hitting her according to her. It's her's. Maybe if she didn't get him mad, maybe if she cooked better then he wouldn't beat her for making crappy food. maybe he's stressed out at work. People in such abusive relationships often have trouble leaving them because they believe that their spouse is a good person, that it isn't their fault that they hit them, but it's their fault. Same with God, because people automatically presume perfect, they assume that if bad things happen to them, it's their fault, not the deity's. Well, I'm just a lowly sinner, well, those people were evil, they had it coming, well, we're all hopelessly corrupt and we're all gonna burn for eternity for making a couple mistake (one of which is simply being born, if you count original sin) and it's all our fault. It can't be God's because he's perfect, I'm just a lowly sinner, what do I know?

Can't you guys see how evil and abusive this is? Quite frankly, many Christian excuses for God's behavior are no better than a battered spouse defending their abuser.

As for the rest of your post, I know you keep trying to egg me on here, but I'm done feeding the troll. I already demonstrated why you're wrong in like 5 different ways by now. Debating you is like playing chess with a pigeon. It doesnt matter how good at chess you are, it's just gonna knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it's victorious. You seem especially good at the whole strutting part. If you want my response, read the first 200 posts of the previous topic up to the point where I blocked you.


This is why you can't criticize God. You shoot yourself in the foot by damaging the validity of your own source.
X cannot be both true and untrue.
Principle of non-contradiction.


Ok, I will respond to this because this is newish and I really think this logic is bad.

Spiderman takes place in New York.

New York is a real place.

Therefore, Spiderman is real.

If you accept one part of it you must accept all of it m i rite? In real world, there are things called half truths. Just because there is one correct thing in a book doesn't mean everything is correct. You may say this destroys the validity of the source, and I will agree with you. This is why I am an atheist. You are assuming the Bible cannot and does not contradict itself, and this may not be true. This is where a lot of Christian go wrong, actually.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | GTX 580 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#20ThuggernautzPosted 1/18/2013 1:05:03 PM
OW posted...

Because right next to where it says "God is perfect" it says "God killed the Canaanites", something that you take issue with.


Right next to where a textbook says "Nothing travels faster than the speed of light" it says "Pink unicorns travel at 4X the speed of light", something that you take issue with.

So if that line about nothing travels faster than light isn't true, then how can you say a pink unicorn did? Aren't you throwing the entire source of your criticism into suspicion?

This is the trap you've stumbled into.
I predict you'll whine about it, rather than actual argue against the logic.

Here's the thing with what you wrote. One of those claims is potentially verifiable (the slaughter of the Canaanite's men, women, children and animals), the other is not. In any reasonably sane person's mind, you would at least claim that the entire thing is invalid while searching for verification of the claims that you can. It's amusing that you accuse him of cherry picking, when that's precisely what you're doing.

Lord_Ichmael posted...

Indeed, which is partly why I think the Bible isn't a valid source of information at all- it contradicts itself too much. I'm just speaking in the context of evaluating what it says within itself.


Precisely. Not only that, but the Bible's veracity is further diminished by the amount of false historical claims made within its pages. Add the unsolvable (due to non-demonstrability) contradictions which invalidate claims on either side on top of many claims of historical falsehood and you should come away with the pretty obvious notion that the source is not trustworthy.