|
|
|
bjones
Skeptic Friend
Australia
82 Posts |
 Posted - 08/23/2001 : 05:01:49
|
I argue that it is the threat of eternal damnation and not the promise of eternal life is what keep most people in their religion especially Catholic. As it is the Catholic religion that presses the threat of eternal agony in Hell particularly hard. I know because I was a Catholic myself once. For I long time I was such a captive of their terrifying doctrine; terrified of missing mass on Sundays and endless nightmares of their “Hellfire and Purgatory”. As a teenager I began to ask questions, as all this Hellfire was base on pure anecdotal evidence with no hard evidence at all to back up those outrageous claims of torture and torment. Questions like “what is the fuel the fuels the fire of hell made of”? Is hell round or flat? Flat like they used to believe the Earth be at one time in the paleo-iron age past. A past the church is still stuck in to this day. Although the question of what the fuel that fuels the fires of hell is made of, is treated as blasphemous. I feel hell goes a long way to fuel the fires of dogmatic religions to ensure they last for generations to come.
Bob
|
|
|
theatheistknight
New Member
USA
13 Posts |
 Posted - 08/23/2001 : 05:45:23 [Permalink]
|
God vs. Satan. Heaven vs. Hell. Good vs. Evil.
Good vs. Evil in it's self is a reality. Evil, being defined as amoral or destructive or hurtful, is being battled by those who would bring peace to the world.
However, when God and religion is thrown into the mix, we have a whole new concept of Good vs. Evil.
God is the supposed creator of everything. Including Satan and Hell. Satan is the enemy of God. We are all led to believe that Lucifer the Morningstar, the Angel of Light, became the first of the fallen angels and declared war on God.
Now the real trouble begins.
Now assuming God isn't Frankenstein, his creations could not do any emotional or physical harm to him. If they could, then that means God has emotions and a physical form. We are told he doesn't. So that kind of damage is out of the question.
So, in order to do harm to God, Satan walks the earth and turns people away from God. But how exactly does this hurt God. If God wants us all to join his side in Heaven, why let us be tempted.? Why give us a choice? Where I am going with this tend to leave the subject I am already on, so I shall leave it there.
Back to the subject. Satan has declared war on God. Who, in their right mind, would fight somebody whom could destroy them with a snap of the fingers. It makes no sense that Lucifer should declare war agaist God. Unless....
God wanted him to. And if we are to believe xians, God is always in control. So technically, Lucifer is not the satan, but another of God's underlings.
Which also means God is in charge of Hell as well.
This makes God nothing more than a severe parent, who punishes his children by setting them on fire if they don't apologize for whatever they did.
If I did believe in God, the fear of eternal punishment would weigh heavily on my mind.
But lucky for me I don't, so I am free to make all the graven images I want.
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Friedrich Nietzsche |
 |
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2001 : 00:35:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I argue that it is the threat of eternal damnation and not the promise of eternal life is what keep most people in their religion especially Catholic.
I have several good friends who are Catholic. They do not go to church every Sunday, and don't seem terribly concerned about going to Hell. They really believe that as long as they live a good life God will look out for them. Because of this (and several other opinions of theirs), I have come to believe that Catholics are among the most open-minded of Christians. quote:
Who, in their right mind, would fight somebody whom could destroy them with a snap of the fingers. It makes no sense that Lucifer should declare war agaist God. Unless....
God wanted him to. And if we are to believe xians, God is always in control. So technically, Lucifer is not the satan, but another of God's underlings.
First: where was it ever asserted that Lucifer is/was in his (if gender applies to angels) right mind? Second: Christians say that everything happens with God's knowledge. This does not mean that God wanted all of it to happen, just that he allowed it to happen. God might have decided that the ultimate benefit to come from his creation outweighs the bad things that happen.
I am afraid I'm not clever enough to come up with a good signature, eh? |
|
|
|
bjones
Skeptic Friend
Australia
82 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2001 : 02:44:01 [Permalink]
|
I trust you you are not one of those atheists who make a death bed conversion in fear of eternal damnation.
I am sure I will not be making one of those death bed conversions, as it is impossible know which is the right God to convert to. God is such an ambiguous concept you can never possibly know which is the right God.
And that is all he/she is in my mind – just a concept – based purely on anecdotal evidence.
I can rest easy now knowing that he/she is nothing but a concept; nothing but an ambiguous word in the dictionary. So theists should not trouble me by merely talking about God or Gods but produce hard evidence of his/her existence.
Bob
quote:
God vs. Satan. Heaven vs. Hell. Good vs. Evil.
Good vs. Evil in it's self is a reality. Evil, being defined as amoral or destructive or hurtful, is being battled by those who would bring peace to the world.
However, when God and religion is thrown into the mix, we have a whole new concept of Good vs. Evil.
God is the supposed creator of everything. Including Satan and Hell. Satan is the enemy of God. We are all led to believe that Lucifer the Morningstar, the Angel of Light, became the first of the fallen angels and declared war on God.
Now the real trouble begins.
Now assuming God isn't Frankenstein, his creations could not do any emotional or physical harm to him. If they could, then that means God has emotions and a physical form. We are told he doesn't. So that kind of damage is out of the question.
So, in order to do harm to God, Satan walks the earth and turns people away from God. But how exactly does this hurt God. If God wants us all to join his side in Heaven, why let us be tempted.? Why give us a choice? Where I am going with this tend to leave the subject I am already on, so I shall leave it there.
Back to the subject. Satan has declared war on God. Who, in their right mind, would fight somebody whom could destroy them with a snap of the fingers. It makes no sense that Lucifer should declare war agaist God. Unless....
God wanted him to. And if we are to believe xians, God is always in control. So technically, Lucifer is not the satan, but another of God's underlings.
Which also means God is in charge of Hell as well.
This makes God nothing more than a severe parent, who punishes his children by setting them on fire if they don't apologize for whatever they did.
If I did believe in God, the fear of eternal punishment would weigh heavily on my mind.
But lucky for me I don't, so I am free to make all the graven images I want.
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2001 : 09:54:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I trust you you are not one of those atheists who make a death bed conversion in fear of eternal damnation.
I am sure I will not be making one of those death bed conversions, as it is impossible know which is the right God to convert to. God is such an ambiguous concept you can never possibly know which is the right God.
And that is all he/she is in my mind – just a concept – based purely on anecdotal evidence.
I can rest easy now knowing that he/she is nothing but a concept; nothing but an ambiguous word in the dictionary. So theists should not trouble me by merely talking about God or Gods but produce hard evidence of his/her existence.
Bob
Bob,
Thank you for your input on the subject of God(dess). In future, please remember that religion tends to be a highly emotionally charged subject and the practioners of that religion could infer an insult from your characterization of God(dess) as an ambiguious word in the dictionary. Although the term may be ambigious to you, thiests may have a different view. God(dess) to them has a much deeper connotative meaning than a concept. If you do not have a God belief, that is fine. I have studied several different religions and selected the one which I felt was most right for me. It satisfied specific spiritual needs that I had. If you are devoid of these needs, then I wish you well on your path. But as you are entitled to your path, so am I to mine. Please respect that in the future.
|
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2001 : 15:05:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Although the term may be ambigious to you, thiests may have a different view. God(dess) to them has a much deeper connotative meaning than a concept.
It seems odd to me that you should make a claim that the term God(dess) is not ambiguous in these threads where, if nothing else is clear, it is clear that we have no hard and fast definition of that term.
Even the parenthetical alteration you make of the word increases the ambiguity rather than lessen it.
I might also recommend that if Theists believe that they should be able to declare that there is a god(dess) without anyone taking offense, then they should extent the same honor to those whose opinions differ.
-------
The brain that was stolen from my laboratory was a criminal brain. Only evil will come from it. |
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2001 : 18:33:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I might also recommend that if Theists believe that they should be able to declare that there is a god(dess) without anyone taking offense, then they should extent the same honor to those whose opinions differ.
And which of the Theists who post here has *not* extended that same "honor"?
"If in the last few years you haven't discarded a major opinion or acquired a new one, check your pulse. You may be dead." |
|
|
|
theatheistknight
New Member
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2001 : 02:03:22 [Permalink]
|
I will not be a deathbed converter. In fact, I have already stated to my family, that when I die, I do not want any religion involved in my funeral.
Not it is time for more of my "Hypothetical God" nonsense,
Note: I may jump all over the place, but please bear with me.
The following argument has been fought back by xians stating, "that story was not to be taken literally." In all of the Bibles I have seen, I have not come across any footnote proclaiming such verse to be metaphorical, philosophical or, literal. What is to be taken literal in the Bible (chose one) is up to the readers own interpretation.
The story I am talking about is the about Adam and Eve.
God created Adam and Eve. God created the Tree of Knowledge. God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. They did anyway. God punished them (and us). Now on to my arguments.
If God did not want them to eat from the tree, why did he put it in the Garden of Eden?
If he put it there to test them, and new they were going to fail, why not save all the trouble and abandon the idea. (Like he did with the dinosaurs  
Unless he wanted them to fail. Which brings up the point that God's good intentions may not be what they are all cracked up to be.
Another point brought up is maybe God doesn't want to change the events he has sent into motion or he can't.
If he can't, then he has limited power. Not the All Powerful God xians make him out to be.
If he doesn't want to, then he truly is evil.
The following I read on another site. I am writing down by memory alone. I do not remember which site I read this on, and my apologies go out to it's author for giving proper credit.
If a man were to create a machine to stop killer tidal waves, he would be considered a good guy. If he decides he doesn't want to use and millions perish from the tidal wave, he would be considered evil.
Now a tidal wave goes in and kills millions of people. God could have stopped it, but he didn't. Yet people still consider him good.
That's when God is above our standards argument pops in. If he is above our standards, why should we hold him to what we consider good and evil. It may be the opposite with him.
God may be a good idea, but so was communism.
Thank God I am an Atheist.
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Friedrich Nietzsche |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2001 : 13:05:13 [Permalink]
|
On All Things Considered they had a piece about a German psychiatrist who was getting a lot of flak over her new book. It seems that German is the only language that has a word that means "the joy one feels over the pain felt by others". German manners (morals?) have changed so in the last half century that this word is no longer used in polite company. She (the psychiatrist) thinks that this joy is a very healthy thing to have (must be a Three Stooges fan) and wrote a politically incorrect book to say so.
In English we also have a word that is no longer used for much the same reasons. That word is Ridiculous meaning a person or thing that is worthy of being ridiculed (made fun of). Manners (at least those here in Northern California) now dictate that people, and their ideas, be shown respect no matter how "ridiculous" they are.
At a recent meeting, the young woman at the podium shook her head and said, "…but who among us can actually say what is crazy, and what is not?" She frowned and added, "I see that our Doctor Slater has raised his hand."
"Something I learned at my mother's knee," I replied.
All the people there who were in their 30's, or less, glared. Those of my generation smiled and nodded, several giving me the "thumbs up."
Now, with that said….
Atheism is not the rejection of God.
Atheists have never been presented with a god to reject. The rejection of a god would be an incredibly arrogant, not to mention dangerous, thing to do.
Atheism is the rejection of a CLAIM that there is a god. A claim made by people who are as demonstrably human as anyone else.
This claim is rejected because it is unsubstantiated, even after thousands of years of it being made.
Originally when proof was asked of this claim the Skeptic asking was presented with slight of hand. Moses turns his magic wand into a snake, Jesus turns water into wine. Shelly pulls a quarter out from behind a child's ear. None of this was proof. All of it was "mis-direction."
When those making this baseless claim gained power their tactics switched. Instead of misdirecting a request for proof they now used force. Accept the claim or be tortured and perhaps murdered. (Admittedly that would have been enough "proof" for me. I would have become a theist in a New York Minute)
Now theism has become a kinder gentler evader of backing up what they claim. Now they are "following their own path" and you must have respect for them for doing so. It's the polite thing to do.
And still there is no proof offered. And for good reason, because there is no proof to be had. Just like those who claim that there is a dinosaur swimming in Lake Champlain in Vermont or that crop circles are made by little men from outer space, there is no proof to even suggest that these claims might possibly be true.
But it is (now) incredibly bad manners to label any unsubstantiated claim as being "ridiculous."
The little boy who told the Emperor that he wasn't wearing any clothing was quite wrong to do so. The politically correct thing for that brat to do would be to say that if the Emperor believes that he isn't naked that is good enough for anybody. After all, who among us can say who is naked and who isn't? Surely none of the other towns folk thought that they were qualified to make such a rash judgement about reality.
-------
The brain that was stolen from my laboratory was a criminal brain. Only evil will come from it. |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2001 : 17:30:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
At a recent meeting, the young woman at the podium shook her head and said, "…but who among us can actually say what is crazy, and what is not?" She frowned and added, "I see that our Doctor Slater has raised his hand."
"Something I learned at my mother's knee," I replied.
All the people there who were in their 30's, or less, glared. Those of my generation smiled and nodded, several giving me the "thumbs up."
Apparently I've missed something because I don't understand why anyone would be glaring?
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
|
comradebillyboy
Skeptic Friend
USA
188 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2001 : 15:08:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
On All Things Considered they had a piece about a German psychiatrist who was getting a lot of flak over her new book. It seems that German is the only language that has a word that means "the joy one feels over the pain felt by others".
i believe there is also such a word in russian. and certianly it is a joy shared by many around the world.
but back to religion. only an infinitly wise, infinitly just, infinitly loving and infinitly merciful god would condemn someone to eternal hellfire for coveting one's neighbor's ass. the god, who in his infinite mercy, clensed the earth of all life, except for noah et al, for reasons still unclear to me. yeah, i can see why he is so popular. sort of the same reason that stalin and mao were popular.
comrade billyboy |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2001 : 20:16:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
God created Adam and Eve. God created the Tree of Knowledge. God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. They did anyway. God punished them (and us). Now on to my arguments.
If God did not want them to eat from the tree, why did he put it in the Garden of Eden?
If he put it there to test them, and new they were going to fail, why not save all the trouble and abandon the idea. (Like he did with the dinosaurs
Unless he wanted them to fail. Which brings up the point that God's good intentions may not be what they are all cracked up to be.
Isn't this a little presumptuous? God could have put the tree there because that's where he wanted the tree. Why do we matter in this?
quote:
Another point brought up is maybe God doesn't want to change the events he has sent into motion or he can't.
If he can't, then he has limited power. Not the All Powerful God xians make him out to be.
If he doesn't want to, then he truly is evil.
.
.
.
If a man were to create a machine to stop killer tidal waves, he would be considered a good guy. If he decides he doesn't want to use and millions perish from the tidal wave, he would be considered evil.
Unless this man discovers that by "fixing" these tidal waves he will seriously upset plate tectonics, destroying more lives in the long run. Is he still evil for not using this machine?
I am afraid I'm not clever enough to come up with a good signature, eh? |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2001 : 07:44:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
God created Adam and Eve. God created the Tree of Knowledge. God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. They did anyway. God punished them (and us).
The best part is that it wasn't the tree of any old knowledge but specifically The Knowledge of Good and Evil. Which means that they couldn't actually know that there was anything wrong with being disobedient and having a snack until after they did so. This is what is called Catch 1 (Catch 22 came much later).
Sounds like grounds for a mistrial to me.
-------
The brain that was stolen from my laboratory was a criminal brain. Only evil will come from it. |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2001 : 09:27:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The best part is that it wasn't the tree of any old knowledge but specifically The Knowledge of Good and Evil. Which means that they couldn't actually know that there was anything wrong with being disobedient and having a snack until after they did so. This is what is called Catch 1 (Catch 22 came much later).
Sounds like grounds for a mistrial to me.
Out of all the excuses and apologies for the seeming injustice of the God of the Bible, I've not ever heard a true believer answer this one simple fact.
Why were Adam and Eve (and all of humanity from this point on) punished when they didn't even know what "wrong" meant at the time they committed the forbidden act?
quote:
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
Harsh...
------------
Hope springs eternal but there's no conviction
Actions mistaken for lip service paid
All this concern is the true contradiction
The world is insane... |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2001 : 15:23:59 [Permalink]
|
It's really a mistake to think that the Garden of Eden story is so screwed up because it came that way to begin with. It took quite a bit of work to make it as silly as it is.
The oldest version I can find is a Sumerian myth.
One of the gods (Marduk) gets the idea that he would like to try his hand at gardening. He creates a beautiful paradise. Before too long he realizes that he's no Martha Stewart and that he hates getting his hands dirty. But he and the other gods love hanging out in the garden and having a good time.
His solution to the problem is to create Sargon and his wife (first man & woman) as semi-mindless slaves to pull the weeds and serve the cocktails. (Note: this is a creation myth from an agrarian culture in an arid region. It explains why people are doing something that is as little fun as farming) Marduk made man without knowledge so that he would stay a slave and work in the garden. But he also made him mortal so that even if he did act up he would live only 30 or 40 years and could then be replaced by a new gardener.
Now in the garden lived snake and his mate (the caduceus). Snake was wise and good and took pity on the slaves. He told Sargon that at either end of the garden were two branches of the world tree. On one grew the fruit of eternal life on the other the fruit of the knowledge of culture and craft. If you eat from both of these trees you will become one of the gods. (When the snake slitters to Eden he is still referring to god in the plural when he gives much the same advice, old habits die hard)
Sargon figures that he has a good chance of getting to one tree but not both before the alarms go off. If he gets to the tree of eternal life he will live forever --but as god's slave. He chooses freedom over life and goes for the tree of knowledge.
Marduk is pissed. He sends lion-birds (cherubs) to drive the humans out of the garden. Unfortunately for the gods, the lion-birds destroy the garden while driving the people out.
Meanwhile man is on his merry way to freedom and culture no longer a slave of heaven. He can even make his own gardens if he feels like it. Happy ending.
Much the same story as Adam, but with a very different meaning.
You might have recognized this as being a base myth to that of Prometheus.
-------
The brain that was stolen from my laboratory was a criminal brain. Only evil will come from it. |
|
|
|
comradebillyboy
Skeptic Friend
USA
188 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2001 : 22:11:14 [Permalink]
|
credible threats will often produce desired results. fear of the fires of hell must outweigh the charms of heaven, where the big reward is to sing jesus praises for eternity.
comrade billyboy |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
