God and War

[sweetnpetite]

But I say that man created god in his own image. And it's an ugly image.

I

In which case we idolize ourselves.

But pretend we don't.

 

[lewdandlicentious]

There are more than just the two options (as a democratic response):

1) God doesn't exist.
2) God exists and isn't aware of the situation.
3) God exists, is aware of the situation and cannot do anything about it.
4) God exists, is aware of the situation and doesn't want to do anything about it.
5) God exists, is aware of the situation and is doing something about it.
6) God exists, is aware of the situation and is propogating it ("for" it).

I think there might be others, but there you go.

Personally, I believe #5.

Martin Luther King, Jr.; Ghandi; Mother Teresa... I think God's agenda is fine.

Joe, no offence mate, but blind religious people like you make me want to shout. Seriously.

THERE IS NO GOD!

Religion is an emotional crutch for those who can't handle the thought that there is no divine entity that controls everything.

Newsflash people:

THERE IS NO DIVINE ENTITY THAT CONTROLS EVERYTHING

There is no reason for anything. We are just here.

WE JUST ARE!!!

 

[maggot420]

I don't believe in God...but I'm still scared of him

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by thebullet
Sorry if you think that I am rude, Joe, but I have a very cynical view of religion.

I don't find you rude. I found your comment rude. Being cynical may be your condition, and for many its a very fashionable condition to have these day, but rude comments are never quite necessary.

You find religion to be an unnecessary invention, I won't argue that--what you find or believe to be goodly or not is your business; but I could be cynical about motherhood, doesn't justify my calling your Mom a bitch.

Just saying.

I still think you write good porn.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by lewdandlicentious
Joe, no offence mate, but blind religious people like you make me want to shout. Seriously.

THERE IS NO GOD!

Religion is an emotional crutch for those who can't handle the thought that there is no divine entity that controls everything.

Newsflash people:

THERE IS NO DIVINE ENTITY THAT CONTROLS EVERYTHING

There is no reason for anything. We are just here.

WE JUST ARE!!!

Blind anti-religious people like you are the biggest detriment to the advancement of every form of basic rational analysis ever taken on by man.

We have no proof that there is no God, only great stretches of time and tradition of belief that there is. As such, assumptions like "there is no God" are foundationless and purely philosophically ignorant. "There might be, there might not be" is a better answer.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by sweetnpetite
Would you consider it good if a mother has two children and decides that only one deserves her consideration and so kills the other? Further more, she has *chosen* to give birth to each of them. She 'made' them both on purpose. But she didn't like the way the one turned out.

Sure, she seems 'merciful' to the living child for sparing his/her life, but does that really make her merciful in the true sence of the word?

Shes been 'good' to one clild- but is she *good* To say she *is* good, is completly self centered and one sided- not truth.

You're probably not going to like this, but what /is/ essentially "Good" is a hard question, too. Especially in relation to situations like the one you're describing.

I don't know that I can intelligently answer your question in any other way than providing the possible "goods" that make her actions goodly or not.

 

[fifty5]

Look, my friend. ANYONE who gets a letter from (her)his GP should believe in God. After all, (s)he has personal experience of a miracle.

ROFLMAO!

The double meaning makes it even better!

Roll on...

F6

 

[fifty5]

God is apparently not any good against Metal

-Colly

Vegetarian, thats like the indian word for poor hunter isn't it?

That juxtaposition has me going yet again.

Love your irony!

f6

 

[fifty5]

Not to downplay or ignore the atrocity in the world, but I believe in #5 because I cannot deny the genuinely good things, people, and movements that have come to pass. If I am to believe in God, I find these to be powerful examples of divine hope and direction toward a better world in the midst of a world that doesn't seem to be so naturally.

Should I take it that you're being ironic, Joe? Option 5 was that there is a god who gets off on war - people killing and maiming other people!

f6

 

[fifty5]

We are God's tv. He created us for his amusment, now he's watching to see how it all plays out. (just a thought.)

Sweet,

That's the only view of God that I find at all credible - but I've too much self respect to 'worship' any such being. If the cost of that is eternal damnation, then fuck it: I'll go gladly rather than kow-tow to such an infernal bastard!

f6 (Yes, I know that pride is advertised as a sin, but that seems equally disgusting to me - it must depend on what one is proud of.)

PS If you haven't read any of Robert Heinlein's comments on the Bible, do. You'd find them a real blast! Especially on some of the old testament, like the story of the chap who got extra marks for killing children who were playing too loud in the hearing of a prophet, or another who offered his wife and daughter to a mob for their 'pleasure' rather than disturb a 'holy man' - and again got a gold star for righteousness!)

 

[fifty5]

Well, to be fair, we're talking about some pretty hard-to-nail down things. Not the least of which being "does goodness demand that all human life be allowed to live" or "is human life, individually, a divine concern"?

Well, for a God worthy of respect, those aren't very hard at all.

In the first case, of course, though not in freedom to perpetrate evil.

The second is equally obviously true.

If not, then God is diabolic, not worshipful.

Let's face it, 'God' is a self evidently self-contradictory concept - incomprehensible - superstitious nonsense. In contrast, comprehending the real universe just takes centuries of work by men of genius. Unlike 'it's God's will..." that isn't a soft-option cop-out!

f6

 

[thebullet]

another who offered his wife and daughter to a mob for their 'pleasure' rather than disturb a 'holy man'

I'm no Biblical expert, but as I remember the story was that the person in question (Lot?) had a man visiting him. A crowd accosted his house demanding that Lot(?) send the man out to them so that they might 'know' him. That's right, buddy. That's 'know' in the biblical sense. I think this was in Sodom, but my memory is vague. Lot (?) offered the crowd his daughter instead of his visitor. Well, I guess a female just wasn't worth much back then from their point of view.

Interestingly, right wing Christians quote the old testament all the time, calling it 'the word of God' and insisting that God will smite those that violate His word. Tell me, if God required you to throw your daughter out to a crowd of Sodomites, what would be your reaction? Would you say "well if that's what God wants I'd better do it." Or would you say, "God is just plain nuts!"?

 

[fifty5]

Blind anti-religious people like you are the biggest detriment to the advancement of every form of basic rational analysis ever taken on by man.

We have no proof that there is no God, only great stretches of time and tradition of belief that there is. As such, assumptions like "there is no God" are foundationless and purely philosophically ignorant. "There might be, there might not be" is a better answer.

Sorry, Joe. I really don't have anything against you, only against what you wrote.

That first paragraph is simply wrong. First class scientists and philosophers have been both devout (in any number of religions) and athiests. Religious belief or not simply has nothing whatever to do with most rational analysis.

As far as the second paragraph goes, the statement about duration is accurate, but the inference drawn is completely invalid. The automobile and the aeroplane fit the same condition ('no cars' and 'belief in God' for pretty much the same proportion of the time that homo sapiens has existed), but I assure you that not only cars and aeroplanes, but space vehicles as well (not to mention so much more) are now reality - and only (lack of) mundane human knowledge prevented them before. The physical chemistry & metalurgy, etc. involved has never altered, only human understanding of things has changed.

I don't find "Because it was thought to be true in the dark ages" a convincing argument.

f6

 

[fifty5]

I'm no Biblical expert, but as I remember the story was that the person in question (Lot?) had a man visiting him. A crowd accosted his house demanding that Lot(?) send the man out to them so that they might 'know' him. That's right, buddy. That's 'know' in the biblical sense. I think this was in Sodom, but my memory is vague. Lot (?) offered the crowd his daughter instead of his visitor. Well, I guess a female just wasn't worth much back then from their point of view.

Interestingly, right wing Christians quote the old testament all the time, calling it 'the word of God' and insisting that God will smite those that violate His word. Tell me, if God required you to throw your daughter out to a crowd of Sodomites, what would be your reaction? Would you say "well if that's what God wants I'd better do it." Or would you say, "God is just plain nuts!"?

Exactly.

Personally, I wouldn't let them have even one of my dogs! (And to prevent any misunderstanding, much as I love my dogs, they do rate lower than than humans in my family.)

f6

 

[THE_TRUE_GOD]

Oh



My



God

You called?

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

You called?

Long time no see.

Now we must battle with knives.