God's purpose

[logger]

Asking my pastor too much inconvenient stuff is what got me invited to leave a bible summer camp when I was thirteen. One which I was otherwise doing well enough at that they had already promised me a free week the next year.

A promise which they reneged on. They gave me a bible instead. (Like I didn't already have a few. I asked for the cash equivalent of the week at camp. They didn't like that idea. )

He told me my questions were "confusing" the other campers. What I learned from that is that believers shouldn't mention the inconvenient stuff.

I see nothing has changed.

Now I understand.
It would seem all atheists have had a run in with Christians. I have too and I'm not going to let human beings dictate my eternity. You?

 

[logger]

Conscience is simply a group of symbols forming a two-syllable word to label a feeling which surely must have originated from the altruistic behaviour of humans which enabled them to survive successfully. Those without that behaviour were not numerous enough to prevent our successful survival.

So you agree we have a conscience, thanks.

 

[logger]

As for the second part of your post, nobody referred to "losing" a conscious. Psychopaths and sociopaths never had one. Meaning they lack empathy. It can't be "rebuilt". So god missed them, or, "conscience" isn't from "him".

They never had one, how do you know?

I've seen it rebuilt, through Christ.

 

[logger]

The argument of "free will" is very amusing to me (and I realize that you are shading this away from a strict Fire and Brimstone fundamentalist discussion).

1. The argument reeks of pitiful desperation to try to explain why an all powerful and good God would create evil in this word. "Um, maybe He doesn't wish to impose a moral choice on people, which would ruin his purpose for us!"

2. Why is this the purpose anyway? If one believes in God, then God has already limited us in that we cannot flap our wings and fly. He has limited us in that we can't manipulate facts as fast as a modern computer. He has limited us in our ability to protect our children against physical harm. He has limited us in our ability to oppose powerful, evil men even if a majority of the population is suffering and against a dictator- look at North Korea today. But when it comes to moral choices He instead actually likes to tempt us to make the wrong choice, and bets with Satan as to our choice (if you believe the Bible). Sure- He is willing to kill many, many thousands or millions in earthquakes, Tsunamis, fires, hurricanes, and tornados, but He would never want to interfere in our lives- a moral Prime Directive as it were.

3. How is it "free choice" if we have been informed that making the wrong choice results in immediate punishment and/or everlasting Hell? In fact even on Earth and in almost all cases no one can make another person do anything they don't want to do: they can only make the alternative exceedingly unpleasant. How is this any different from the "free will" of God? "Do whatever you want! You are free! If you choose wrong I will put in in a horrible place for all eternity and you will suffer forever. But make whatever choice you wish- you have free will!"

The more sophisticated (True Christian?) theologians will argue that Hell is not a place of suffering, it is just a place removed from God- in essence if you reject Him, He does not want you around. But clearly even in this toned down version of fire and brimstone preaching the concept of Hell is still meant to be horrible and undesirable.

Finally the argument that God doesn't need us to bow down and worship Him. That is not how the Ten Commandments, let alone the remainder of the Bible, read to me.

And yet with everything you mentioned, we still make the wrong choices, but still have the capacity to make the right ones.

 

[The Big Dog]

Why do you think only believers have the privilege of debating the allegations and tenets of some system? Why do you think a simple reference to "the texts" solves anything, when those who profess belief in those texts debate their meaning hotly among themselves?

If you want a better justification, consider that the Fundamentalists want God's will and purpose to be the basis of American society. Why doesn't that open it up to public discussion? Why must that discussion presuppose a belief in some particular text?

Well, obviously because they are not debating the tenets of some system, they are flatly rejecting the premise under discussion. There are dozens of other threads where the topic is the existence of God, yet our correspondents seem very concerned about coming in this thread and declaring that: there is no God.

All well and good, of course, but the topic here is not the existence of God...there is no God... Yes, that point has been made, but for purposes of discussion... There is no God, and the bible is stupid.... Well here we are discussing the Bible, as such..... you should read a car loan like you read the stupid bible... Car loan? What on earth does that have t do with..... There is no God.

 

[logger]

Or do we believe (my own suspicion) that the God of the Bible is the evil entity and, through usingHis public relations department, has convinced people that He is good and Satan is bad, when the opposite is true. How would you know? God could simply be lying to us. Certainly His performance up to date, but any logical analysis, would suggest otherwise. Whereas "knowledge" which is what makes people special animals, was denied to us by God and came instead from Satan's intervention.

I thought you didn't believe in God?

 

[logger]

I find it interesting that some people read the story of Paul in the New Testament as an example of how one can find redemption in Christ. As far as I see it, however, it is really a story of a narrow minded, soulless, and heartless tax collector continuing to act a creep, but now defending his hypocritical views and lack of empathy as doing the work of God.

Paul wasn't a tax collector, he was a Pharisee, who practiced the most strict laws of the Jews.

A perfect metaphor for so many "Christians" today! If I recall correctly, Paul never even met Christ physically (perhaps that might have helped?).

Wrong again, he met him on the Damascus road.

 

[Magrat]

The issue is what is God's Purpose for Us, one would think that one would go to the texts to discover that.

But you don't believe in God or the Bible. Yet here you are posting.

Curious.

"just checking."

You're telling Thor what he was asking, after he corrected you.

I'm trying to clarify which flavor of Christianity you're trying to apologize for. It is interesting to me. Maybe because I have tried to apologize for it also, but thankfully, learned better.

 

[Magrat]

Now I understand.
It would seem all atheists have had a run in with Christians. I have too and I'm not going to let human beings dictate my eternity. You?

Of course we have. Many christians seem to have interpreted the directive to make converts to mean "browbeat and shame anyone who doesn't agree with you". Some even include excessive amounts of sarcasm.

Fwiw, I spend a *lot* of time with christians, like most of my time, and very few of them act like this. I suspect it is an issue of self identified Christians on the internet.

 

[logger]

I don't think anyone remotely suggested that you voted for Ron Paul. Perhaps you may wish to reconsider your post?

Lol
Hilarious!

 

[Magrat]

They never had one, how do you know?

I've seen it rebuilt, through Christ.

You would be incorrect, per medical science and neurology. I'd be interested to know if the rebuilt individual was actually diagnosed and treated by a psychiatrist for sociopathy or psychopathy, and what how you could know if they *really* have empathy or, as psychopaths are well equipped to do, they are convincing people they've met the requirements made of them until it is convenient to not to.

 

[The Big Dog]

You're telling Thor what he was asking, after he corrected you.

I'm trying to clarify which flavor of Christianity you're trying to apologize for. It is interesting to me. Maybe because I have tried to apologize for it also, but thankfully, learned better.

No actually I was replying to you.

I'm not apologizing for anything, and the subject of the thread is, of course, not me.

 

[logger]

Of course we have. Many christians seem to have interpreted the directive to make concerts to mean "browbeat and shame anyone who doesn't agree with you". Some even include excessive amounts of sarcasm.

Lol, Really, have you seen the responses to my posts?

Fwiw, I spend a *lot* of time with christians, like most of my time, and very few of them act like this. I suspect it is an issue of self identified Christians on the internet.

Lol
Kinda like this one.

 

[Thor 2]

You're making the mistake of us being perfectly created beings, we're not.
Suppose God changed his mind on certain things that make things different here. It's clear he can change his mind, that has to have many impacts down here. throw in free will and life can go in many different directions.

Now did I say anything of the kind? The idea that we were created perfect but then became less so is what other theists bang on about. I just can't get my head around that one to be honest.

I was just speculating on what technique this god of yours may have used in other worlds before favoring this particular one with his loving attention.

 

[Magrat]

Paul wasn't a tax collector, he was a Pharisee, who practiced the most strict laws of the Jews.


Wrong again, he met him on the Damascus road.

Jesus was dead when Paul "met" him. And Paul was blinded by the flash before the encounter. Even if we wanted to believe Paul met the jesus-ghost, he wouldn't have been able to see to verify it.

 

[logger]

You would be incorrect, per medical science and neurology. I'd be interested to know if the rebuilt individual was actually diagnosed and treated by a psychiatrist for sociopathy or psychopathy, and what how you could know if they *really* have empathy or, as psychopaths are well equipped to do, they are convincing people they've met the requirements made of them until it is convenient to not to.

Lol

Because I knew him when he was a hell razor, and when he met Jesus.

 

[Magrat]

No actually I was replying to you.

I'm not apologizing for anything, and the subject of the thread is, of course, not me.

Apologetics. That's actively what you're doing right now.

Thor corrected you further upstream, that he was not asking about God's purpose for US, but just HIS purpose. You've twice said it is his purpose for US this thread is about. You are incorrect.

 

[logger]

Jesus was dead when Paul "met" him. And Paul was blinded by the flash before the encounter. Even if we wanted to believe Paul met the jesus-ghost, he wouldn't have been able to see to verify it.

You need to read the rest of it, he clearly met the lord. You don't need to see someone to have met them.

 

[Magrat]

Lol, Really, have you seen the responses to my posts?


Lol
Kinda like this one.

Who has browbeat you about accepting atheism? Who has told you to ask your local atheist expert because they can't be arsed to defend their own argument? Who has suggested your entire existence is to serve the great Pasta on the sky? That you're a slave to the holy meatball?

I feel like you're so far down the koolaid you don't even realize what you sound like.

 

[The Big Dog]

Apologetics. That's actively what you're doing right now.

Thor corrected you further upstream, that he was not asking about God's purpose for US, but just HIS purpose. You've twice said it is his purpose for US this thread is about. You are incorrect.

Well then, his OP was unfortunately very ambiguous and redundant.

Fortunately, the OP's interpretation is not binding.

What do you think God's purpose for us is?