55
   

What good does religion offer the world today?

NSFW Forums: Religion, Social Media, Idle Discourse, Anti-Religious Memes
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
izzythepush
 
  0  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 03:19 am
@Frank Apisa,
I see you've found a kindred spirit in Humpty Dumpty.
Glennn
 
  2  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 07:52 am
@neologist,
Quote:
It relates to the issue of whether God has the right to set standards for his creation. The choice to eat of the tree represented their rejection of God's right.

The issue is not whether or not the god had the right to set standards for his creation. The issue is why the god would have a problem with its creation exercising the free will it gave to them. Also, we know that the god decided to exercise its free will to not be aware of the corrupting influence slithering around in the home it created for Adam and Eve. What is the punishment for the god's negligence in this case?
Glennn
 
  2  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 07:57 am
@neologist,
Quote:
No problem. Apparently, you were an observer to the events in Genesis, since you are able to assure us that the light mentioned in Genesis 1:3 came from some other source than the sun.

None of us was an observer to the events of creation according to Genesis. But the account leaves you with the task of telling me the difference between the light mentioned in Genesis 1:3, and the sun which came later on.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 09:15 am
@izzythepush,
Quote:
I see you've found a kindred spirit in Humpty Dumpty.


Just like you and Quisling.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 09:20 am
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
None of us was an observer to the events of creation according to Genesis.
Nor was Moses, who wrote only what is necessary
Glenn wrote:
But the account leaves you with the task of telling me the difference between the light mentioned in Genesis 1:3, and the sun which came later on.
What is necessary for us is to know that the creation of the sun was recorded in Genesis 1:1: a Google of the phrase "prehistoric atmosphere" provides sufficient speculation about the opaque nature of the gasses to explain why luminaries would not be identifiable until much later. Why it is an issue here is a conundrum, however.
neologist
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 09:26 am
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
The issue is not whether or not the god had the right to set standards for his creation. The issue is why the god would have a problem with its creation exercising the free will it gave to them.
You confuse free will with license. Free will is God's gift. License is not.
Quote:
Also, we know that the god decided to exercise its free will to not be aware of the corrupting influence slithering around in the home it created for Adam and Eve. What is the punishment for the god's negligence in this case?
Satan was sinless until he chose to sin. He also has free will.
Glennn
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 11:42 am
@neologist,
Quote:
a Google of the phrase "prehistoric atmosphere" provides sufficient speculation

Not interested in speculation. We're discussing the biblical account of the chronological order of creation. You are stating that the light referred to in Genesis 1:3 is the same as the sun, which was created later on. This is an inconsistency within the narrative. You are attempting to make sense of this inconsistency.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 11:46 am
@neologist,
Quote:
You confuse free will with license. Free will is God's gift. License is not.


Free will without license is not free. Just so we're clear on something, what is the penalty for not doing exactly what the god says to do with the "gift" of free will?
Glennn
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 11:50 am
@neologist,
Quote:
Satan was sinless until he chose to sin. He also has free will.

How does that answer the question of the god's culpability in not being aware of the corrupting influence slithering around in the home it created for Adam and Eve? And what is the punishment for the god's negligence in this case? Or has it absolved itself of all responsibility for what followed its actions?
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 12:07 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
Free will without license is not free. Just so we're clear on something, what is the penalty for not doing exactly what the god says to do with the "gift" of free will?
Does your head hurt?
The US is considered a free country.
Are you free to murder?
InfraBlue
 
  2  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 12:11 pm
@neologist,
This question, as well, has no bearing on the fact that God gave Satan permission to do to Job/humankind what Satan wills with the exception of murder.
Glennn
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 12:16 pm
@neologist,
Quote:
Does your head hurt?
The US is considered a free country.
Are you free to murder?


I have no idea why you want to know if my head hurts.

Anyway, I see you are attempting to equate disbelief in god with the crime of murder. I will remind you of my question: What is the penalty for not doing exactly what the god says to do with the "gift" of free will?

And this: How does that answer the question of the god's culpability in not being aware of the corrupting influence slithering around in the home it created for Adam and Eve? And what is the punishment for the god's negligence in this case? Or has it absolved itself of all responsibility for what followed its actions--or in this case, its inaction?
farmerman
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 12:19 pm
@Glennn,
Some of the Churches have some damn fine cooks who volunteer to make things for sales during various times of the year. Like St Basil's up in Frackville Pa has "Pasty Day" every second Tuesday. They make several kinds of pasty's that you can buy for take -out. The Sodality ladies start making em the day before and they bake em off on Tues right before lunch.

They also make some damn fine soft-pretzels
Glennn
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 12:24 pm
@farmerman,
I know some damn fine cooks, too; probably better than the ones you know.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 01:23 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
I have no idea why you want to know if my head hurts.

Anyway, I see you are attempting to equate disbelief in god with the crime of murder. I will remind you of my question: What is the penalty for not doing exactly what the god says to do with the "gift" of free will
The assertion I was responding to was
Glennn wrote:
Free will without license is not free.
Holding 2 contradictory views must be at least tiring, if not painful.
neologist
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 01:26 pm
@InfraBlue,
However, it is relevant to your agenda.
What should God have done instead?
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 01:42 pm
@neologist,
How is my agenda relevant?

Your question is irrelevant to the text being discussed.
neologist
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 02:56 pm
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
How is my agenda relevant?

Your question is irrelevant to the text being discussed.
I asked about this statement:[
InfraBlue wrote:
This has no bearing on the fact that God gave Satan carte blanche to do to Job/humankind what Satan wills, except for murder.
I am merely asking if you believe God had other options more acceptable to you, particularly the option of destroying Satan for his rebellion.
Glennn
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 03:03 pm
@neologist,
Quote:
Holding 2 contradictory views must be at least tiring, if not painful.


I agree. You are attempting to portray the god as offering the gift of free will to its creation, yet believing that not acting in accordance with the will of the god will bring a penalty at the hands of the god--a penalty that you have yet to name. To give the gift of free will, and then attach conditions of punishment to it is called coercion.

Also, you are incapable of following the concept of culpability to its source due to your one-dimensional thinking. The god is the origin of the problem. Not only was he unaware of the serpent in the garden--which was its first mistake--he also neglected to do something about it upon learning about it--which was another mistake.

One thing about mindless worship is that the worshiper will make excuses for the contradictions inherent in the behavior of that which they worship. And this dynamic is easily seen by your avoidance of giving an answer to this:

How do you answer the question of the god's culpability in not being aware of the corrupting influence slithering around in the home it created for Adam and Eve? And what is the punishment for the god's negligence in this case? Or has it absolved itself of all responsibility for what followed its actions--or in this case, its inaction?

InfraBlue
 
  1  
Fri 16 Oct, 2015 03:18 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:
I am merely asking if you believe God had other options more acceptable to you, particularly the option of destroying Satan for his rebellion.

What is acceptable to me is irrelevant to the text at hand.
 

Related Topics

What if no religions are correct, but there still is a God? - Question by neologist
We are all like little children who often say: "Mom, Dad, leave me alone, I want to be on my own". - Question by Leaffan
How can we be sure that all religions are wrong? - Discussion by reasoning logic
Beyond tribalism; How well does your religious label serve you? - Discussion by MattDavis
Is religion responsible for the opposition to peace in the Israel-Palestine conflict? - Question by maxdancona
Concern for Religious Freedom or Preaching Political Messages? - Discussion by wandeljw
Why People Seek Solace In Gods. - Question by mark noble
Catholic remarried couples should abstain from sex - Question by Tes yeux noirs
How can a good God allow suffering - Question by SawyerMentink
Religion and Fear - Discussion by TomTomBinks
A question for athiests - Question by onevoice
 
  1. Forums
  2. » What good does religion offer the world today?
  3. » Page 35
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 02/05/2025 at 09:38:22
▲ ▼