Originally posted by BigDoggProblemPerhaps its because your definition of arrogance is skewed. Many people (Christians as well) misconstrue mealy-mouthed meekness with humility. That is not the case, according to God.
If you followers of God have really 'humbled yourselves' to the truths of God, then why do so many of you still sound so arrogant?
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou've so obviously been able to "humble yourself". It's a damn shame that a lesser man like Twain never acheived your level of intellect.
It must be difficult for you, able to argue away the many weak logic arguments offered by Christians of lesser intellect and yet be faced with a nagging unrelenting sense of fear. I honestly don't know how you do it.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYour confusion results from your starting with a false premise. I'm not so wedded to my identity that I can't bear the thought of its cessation.
It must be difficult for you, able to argue away the many weak logic arguments offered by Christians of lesser intellect and yet be faced with a nagging unrelenting sense of fear. I honestly don't know how you do it.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIt is the fear of death --- fear of the unknown --- which drives so much of religion.
It must be difficult for you, able to argue away the many weak logic arguments offered by Christians of lesser intellect and yet be faced with a nagging unrelenting sense of fear. I honestly don't know how you do it.
The blindly religious clutch the security blanket of their faith so tightly that, in spite
of tremendous evidence, they will continue to assert absolute absurdities are true.
Telerion posted a courageous post some time ago in which he freely admitted fear
of death. Unfortunately, the thread was mired with 'JUST ACCEPT JESUS AND DON'T
BE SCARED' and so forth, that its refreshing candor was ultimately drowned amongst
dogmaticism.
The fact of the matter is, you may be able to convince yourself faith in an afterlife is
really a known truth, but you're just kidding yourselves. You're just a scared child
unwilling to confront the unknown honestly and the nagging knowledge that just one
little eensy teeny part of your Sacred Book just might not be true galls you more than
the fear that bbarr the atheist or Nemesio the theist could ever fear in having part of
belief be unknown.
Fear has driven religion and ignorance is its tool. The Roman Church thrived on fear for
centuries, and the evangelical church utilizes it now. Don't fool yourself by claiming it is
bbarr who is running scared.
Nemesio
Originally posted by whodeyWe have two choices. Dont have children or have children in this cruel world. The cruelty is not our choice and we try our best to minimise it. God either has more choices or he is incapable of minimising the cruelty of the world. That is he has little or no control over his creation. Or possibly he somehow justifies the cruelty as beneficial to us. Or he is just plain cruel. Or he is a myth. Whatever the case the comparison between God and parent in this particular case is invalid.
Why do we then have children if the world is such a terrible place? Are we then just as culpable, if not more so, as God is, seeing as how we see things better than he?
Originally posted by NemesioDo you need a soapbox too?
It is the fear of death --- fear of the unknown --- which drives so much of religion.
The blindly religious clutch the security blanket of their faith so tightly that, in spite
of tremendous evidence, they will continue to assert absolute absurdities are true.
Telerion posted a courageous post some time ago in which he freely admitted fear
of death. ...[text shortened]... es it now. Don't fool yourself by claiming it is
bbarr who is running scared.
Nemesio
Originally posted by Bosse de NageBefore this makes any sense you have to ask what death is. To atheists, death refers to cessation of life. For theists it varies quite a bit and is often considered a good thing. Cirtainly in Jesus' case it would be nothing more than a task he was asked to perform not some terrible unforgivable 'send your only son to die' kind of thing. The hardest part for Jesus would have been resisting the Devils temptation. We all know that God loves to test people and seems to think that it is a very good thing to do so why not test his own son?
God as parent...he only has one son and sends him to die...tut tut...
Are we morally obligated to test our children in simmilar ways?
Originally posted by twhiteheadYour question does not parallel Jesus's situation. It should be:
Before this makes any sense you have to ask what death is. To atheists, death refers to cessation of life. For theists it varies quite a bit and is often considered a good thing. Cirtainly in Jesus' case it would be nothing more than a task he was asked to perform not some terrible unforgivable 'send your only son to die' kind of thing. The hardest part f ...[text shortened]... why not test his own son?
Are we morally obligated to test our children in simmilar ways?
Are we morally obligated to allow our children to be tested in similar ways?
What do you think? Does a parent have a moral obligation to permit his/her children to go out and see the world, to make their own decisions?
Originally posted by lucifershammerI was actually not just refering to Jesus' situation but rather the tendency throughout the old testament for God to test his followers and his chosen people (his children)
Your question does not parallel Jesus's situation. It should be:
Are we morally obligated to allow our children to be tested in similar ways?
What do you think? Does a parent have a moral obligation to permit his/her children to go out and see the world, to make their own decisions?
However I disagree with you on Jesus' situation itself as the Bible is fairly clear (to me) that God sent his only son to die on the cross, he did not 'permit him to go see the world'. The only decision for Jesus' was whether to obey God or join Satan. The answer to which is ... duh.
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo you don't think that God exists and you are saying that the cruelty in this world is not mankinds choice? We can't control it, just minimize it? So I guess what you are saying is that God forces men to be cruel, even though he does not exist? Then you go on to say that the cruelty and suffering are the choices of an all powerfull God and not man, and we then choose to go out and throw more children out into the world? Interesting.
We have two choices. Dont have children or have children in this cruel world. The cruelty is not our choice and we try our best to minimise it. God either has more choices or he is incapable of minimising the cruelty of the world. That is he has little or no control over his creation. Or possibly he somehow justifies the cruelty as beneficial to us. Or he ...[text shortened]... yth. Whatever the case the comparison between God and parent in this particular case is invalid.