Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Religion
 Fuelling the fires of religion. Hell!!
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 5

tergiversant
Skeptic Friend

USA
284 Posts

Posted - 08/31/2001 :  13:44:19   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit tergiversant's Homepage  Send tergiversant a Yahoo! Message Send tergiversant a Private Message
Sorry for dragging this thread so off-topic just for another semantic pissing contest. I love those. For now, I'm going with "weak" and "strong" (evidently the de facto usenet standard) until someone comes up with a preferable alternative.

Anyhow, I'm going to steer away from that now whlie showing how these tangential matters are in fact somewhat related to the idea of Hell.

Most atheist organizations nowadays have moved towards weak atheism as the more appropriate definition of atheism as a whole, as indicated in the very lengthy post I reproduced from Kirby (the alt.atheism UseNet demigod). American Atheists and Secular Web, two heavy hitters in atheist activism, agree on this matter, characterizing anyone without theistic belief as “atheist.” I'm okay with this; I think it is a rhetorically and politically clever move, really. Now babies are born atheist. Cool.

However, this shift in thinking has, IMHO, resulting in a minor backlash against strong atheists like myself, who want not only to show that the theistic case is evidentially lacking, but that it is downright contradictory and incoherent, and thus cannot possibly be true. My very favorite tool to this end is the argument from hell, presented in ultra-simplified form earlier in this thread. My contention here is that for nearly any traditional Judeo-Christian theology, a contradiction may be derived between the theological claims that God is loving and just and that he damns people to eternal torment. Of course, for the argument to proceed, we must be very careful to define God and Hell in accordance with some particular faith tradition, to avoid burning down straw men effigies with do not really reflect any serious theists position.

So, is anyone out there who cares to argue that God is not unloving and unjust in sending folk to Hell? That God is not, in fact, an inherently contradictory concept in general? That weak atheism is somehow preferable to strong?

"Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione."
Go to Top of Page

@tomic
Administrator

USA
4607 Posts

Posted - 08/31/2001 :  14:04:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit @tomic's Homepage Send @tomic a Private Message
I'm just a lowly agnostic. I leave you atheists to it

Good luck!

@tomic

Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Go to Top of Page

bjones
Skeptic Friend

Australia
82 Posts

Posted - 08/31/2001 :  18:10:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send bjones a Private Message
quote:

Sorry for dragging this thread so off-topic just for another semantic pissing contest. I love those. For now, I'm going with "weak" and "strong" (evidently the de facto usenet standard) until someone comes up with a preferable alternative.

Anyhow, I'm going to steer away from that now whlie showing how these tangential matters are in fact somewhat related to the idea of Hell.

Most atheist organizations nowadays have moved towards weak atheism as the more appropriate definition of atheism as a whole, as indicated in the very lengthy post I reproduced from Kirby (the alt.atheism UseNet demigod). American Atheists and Secular Web, two heavy hitters in atheist activism, agree on this matter, characterizing anyone without theistic belief as “atheist.” I'm okay with this; I think it is a rhetorically and politically clever move, really. Now babies are born atheist. Cool.

However, this shift in thinking has, IMHO, resulting in a minor backlash against strong atheists like myself, who want not only to show that the theistic case is evidentially lacking, but that it is downright contradictory and incoherent, and thus cannot possibly be true. My very favorite tool to this end is the argument from hell, presented in ultra-simplified form earlier in this thread. My contention here is that for nearly any traditional Judeo-Christian theology, a contradiction may be derived between the theological claims that God is loving and just and that he damns people to eternal torment. Of course, for the argument to proceed, we must be very careful to define God and Hell in accordance with some particular faith tradition, to avoid burning down straw men effigies with do not really reflect any serious theists position.

So, is anyone out there who cares to argue that God is not unloving and unjust in sending folk to Hell? That God is not, in fact, an inherently contradictory concept in general? That weak atheism is somehow preferable to strong?

"Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione."



Catholic used to consider eating meat on Friday was a mortal sin and if you died with the stain of mortal sin on you soul you went straight to Hell. Then after Vatican 2 they repealed that law. Who is the Catholic Church who claim to know the mind of this God they speak of and what is supposed to happen to all those so called dammed souls in Hell who decided to just feast on a nice juicy stake prior to Vatican 2.
In the issue of this "all loving and all merciful God" this reminds me of how Saddam Hussein is presented to the Iraqi People who does not hesitate to execute anybody who speak out against. Christians are only deluding when they state "the all loving and merciful" and "the all powerful and almighty” in the same breath.
This God they speak of I feel is more modeled on old Roman Emperors which were the norm back in the days of the early church and were remarkably like our contemporary rulers of Afghanistan and Iran.
As such and if I were a Christian I dread the thought on going to Heaven as much as Hell.

Bob

Remember: when you die your philosophy dies with you.


Go to Top of Page
Page: of 5 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.08 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000