What's More Logical

[lilpixieofterror]

It's a tactic called, "heads I win, tails you lose", Carp. A very handy rhetorical tool. Jesus's words are one thing - they aren't without context, for one - but LAOT errs from the start by trying to "prove" a point with those words but seemingly forgetting that the concomitant worldview isn't universally held to begin with...

My entire point is to be rethrorical. They asked for a standard did they not? I was just naming an example. Carp seems to be quite content with calling other people immoral for not agreeing with him (just see the beat the hell out of your kid post for examples there). He seems to want to push his values on others, why can't I do the same?

Crystal

[Jim E.]

the argument doesn't fall apart. you propose the dirt existed forever and doesn't need a creator. why does an eternal God need a creator if he's the 'first cause'?

A complex universe is often treated by Christians as evidence for God. And yes it does fall apart. If anything complex needs a creator then God would need a creator. Something just existed. We have fantastic evidence that the universe exists. “God” is another matter altogether.

[lilpixieofterror]

A complex universe is often treated by Christians as evidence for God. And yes it does fall apart.

Nope Jimmy, you have failed logic class again eh? I already showed you while youre argument is false. There are many reasons which you failed to adress of WHY Christians think the unverse was created. The second law of thermodynamics, Theory of Relativility, Galaxy seeds, and an exanding unverse just to name a few examples.

If anything complex needs a creator then God would need a creator.

Nonsense, what created the thing that created God? Does it have to be more complex? What created that thing? Guess it's more complex than both of those things eh? The list goes on and on and on. Do you even know anything about the paradox you just created or do you prefer to ignore that your 'proof' is indeed a logical paradox, that defeats itself.

Something just existed.

That's nice, Why can't that something be God?

We have fantastic evidence that the universe exists.

Yep, you have rejected Kant, that is a great start.

“God” is another matter altogether.

Never going to be able to prove everything 100%. I think the evidence is strong that God exist. Some examples I listed above are a few examples of why I believe that.

Crystal

[Adam]

I assume you subscribe to the Bible? If so, why would anyone who believes in something so outrageously stupid and absurdly illogical be concerned with how rational the circumstances of creation are?
My answer is that "A" makes more sense and seems more likely, which isn't to say that this "rational force" didn't make use of evolution, and it certainly had nothing to do with the Bible. Anyone who can believe in the one about the magic apples and the talking snake is seriously deluded.

Actually, MB,
I think your argument, though relevant, is needlessly provocative.
I suggest that the real stake-to-the-heart of LAOT is to point out the total worthlessness of her argument if she is (as I suspect) a Fundamentalist or at least one of the narrow-minded type of "Christian" (if such a term can be applied to people who believe such terrors are in store for people who accept that non-believers will spend eternity in Hell for no fault of their own) who believes all non-Christians will be tortured for eternity in Hell. She probably believes the theology that all good works are as "filthy rags" and (in spite of what Jesus says) useless at the time of judgment. What becomes then of all the "character building" she lauds as the justification for suffering and horrible deaths? Fundamentalist theology cannot argue the Problem of Evil and find any justification for God. If all that character building goes to waste and lands people in Hell anyway, we must to be honest admit that we are stuck with the evil God of Calvinism.
If this is not LilAngelOfTerror's theology, my apologies for offending her. A disavowal of Fundamentalism from her would help clear her good name. Somehow I doubt that she is a Unitarian or Liberal Protestant, however.
Adam

[Jim E.]

Some examples I listed above are a few examples of why I believe that.

I really don’t think you believe that. Criticizing other people doesn’t make you right. You have an emotional desire for God to exist. We can all see that. But you “assume” God’s existence and try to twist the evidence to that. Whatever Crystal.

You provide an excellent example of the dark side of Christianity. “Assume” your conclusion, and attack anyone who disagrees with you. Well gee, Crystal, that’s a fantastic formula for success. Unless you’re expecting your faith to actually deliver. You’re a perfect example of why our school system needs to teach religious criticism. We already have too many brainwashed people running around. We don’t need people like you brainwashing anyone else.

[DurAlvar]

let's say you're right for a moment: God is an "abusive father". how does that disprove him? it means he is unfair according to our definition, not non existent

The paradox of omnipotence was never meant to disprove the idea of an inteligent designer - it is meant to prove that a being cannot exist which is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, because if it were all of these things there would be no suffering. You have to reject (or at least tone down) one of these aspects of your view of God, else hold a contradictory view of the world.

building character has nothing to do with it. according to the biblical model we live in a fallen world. you CANNOT separate that from the biblical model that ALSO SAYS this is not our home and we will go on to live eternally in paradise if we choose Jesus as our savior.

you can't criticize God for injustice and throw out his 'rescue plan' at the same time. it's an error in logic to do so.

Why can't we criticize it? Wouldn't it have been easier to create creatures that would not 'fall' in the first place then to do so, then whip up a 'rescue plan' to save them? Because if God is omniscient, He would have seen that, in the future, these creatures would fall into sin, and could have fixed the faults before He created them.

[DurAlvar]

Nonsense, what created the thing that created God? Does it have to be more complex? What created that thing? Guess it's more complex than both of those things eh? The list goes on and on and on. Do you even know anything about the paradox you just created or do you prefer to ignore that your 'proof' is indeed a logical paradox, that defeats itself.

I think the logical paradox was the point... you can't postulate that everything complex needs a creator and then say that God wasn't created, the contradiction voids the point.

[lilpixieofterror]

Dear Dr Phill,

I really don’t think you believe that.

Wow, you can read minds now? Amazing!

Criticizing other people doesn’t make you right.

Nope criticizing them with evidence that they don't dispute does

You have an emotional desire for God to exist.

I do? Wow, you have a degree in psychlogy and know my mental and emotional state? That is truly amazing! Tell me when you came across this grand revolution.

We can all see that.

Really? Or do you see what you want to see .

But you “assume” God’s existence and try to twist the evidence to that.

1. You assume God's non existance, what is your point?
2. I follow the evidence where it leads.
3. Prove I twisted one shread of evidence.

Whatever Crystal.

Yet you don't answer and tell anyone what I twisted, assume I have some kind of 'emotional' need without proof, and don't argue a single point I made. Christians do not say the unverse is complex so it needs a creator. We say the unverse is complex, begin to exist at a certian point, and everything we know that begins to exist that is complex, has a creator. So why is it illogical? (there is more to it than this, but I'd thought I'd cover the basics first.) As for God, since he never begin to exist, he does not need a creator, your argument was false because it mis-reps Christianity.

You provide an excellent example of the dark side of Christianity.

I do? is this because I disagree with your opinions? So anything that disagrees with you must be wrong. You accusing me of attacking yet you are doing it now. So, I guess you are a hyprocrite.

“Assume” your conclusion, and attack anyone who disagrees with you.

It's called a 'debate form'. You argue points, give reasons and evidence to support your points, and debate them. Try it sometime!

Well gee, Crystal, that’s a fantastic formula for success.

Yep, in a debate form where the entire point is to undermine the oppents postion while supporting your own. Someone does not know anything about debate, do they?

Unless you’re expecting your faith to actually deliver.

I'm planning on logical conclusions to 'deliver' me. You have yet to prove me wrong. So I guess it's working.

You’re a perfect example of why our school system needs to teach religious criticism.

And you're a perfect example why they need to teach logic and debate courses. Learn how to do that before you come into a DEBATE FORM.

We already have too many brainwashed people running around.

Didn't you just accuse me of attacking others while you do the same thing? Can we say 'hyprocrite'?

We don’t need people like you brainwashing anyone else.

Wow, another personal attack, while you accuse others of doing the same thing... such a hyprocrite eh? Why am I brainwashed? Because I disagree with your opinion and give these things called 'logical arguments'.

Crystal

[lilpixieofterror]

Actually, MB,
I think your argument, though relevant, is needlessly provocative.
I suggest that the real stake-to-the-heart of LAOT is to point out the total worthlessness of her argument if she is (as I suspect) a Fundamentalist or at least one of the narrow-minded type of "Christian" (if such a term can be applied to people who believe such terrors are in store for people who accept that non-believers will spend eternity in Hell for no fault of their own)

I'm a fundy? Hehehehehe Sorry, incorrect.

...who believes all non-Christians will be tortured for eternity in Hell.

I do? Even though I argued AGAINST that type of hell on at least one occasion. Whatever you care to say Adam.

She probably believes the theology that all good works are as "filthy rags" and (in spite of what Jesus says) useless at the time of judgment.

I do? Wow, don't know anything about me, do you?

What becomes then of all the "character building" she lauds as the justification for suffering and horrible deaths?

I do? Sorry once again you are mistaken. I believe suffering CAN build character in people. What did Paul say? "All things work for the glory of God for those who love Christ, who are CALLED according to his purpose." That's the center of my arguement.

Fundamentalist theology cannot argue the Problem of Evil and find any justification for God.

I'm not looking for justification at all. If you read a word I said or bothered to ask me what I thought. I believe that is one of the reasons why Evil exist. I also would add that evil is created by our choices in life. You have to go no futher than the local news to see that.

If all that character building goes to waste and lands people in Hell anyway, we must to be honest admit that we are stuck with the evil God of Calvinism.

I'm not a Calvinist nor do I believe that all evil builds up character. I believe it will in those who are 'called according to his purpose.' However; it will not in everyone.

If this is not LilAngelOfTerror's theology, my apologies for offending her.

You are quite incorrect about anything I think or believe.

A disavowal of Fundamentalism from her would help clear her good name. Somehow I doubt that she is a Unitarian or Liberal Protestant, however.

Actually, I don't follow any denomination (haven't found one that suits me). Nothing wrong with liberal theology, I have found alot of it to be useful (while others useless). Fundies are the same way, some useful, others not. I don't ascribe to either postion, so please keep your comments to yourself.

Adam[/QUOTE]

[lilpixieofterror]

I think the logical paradox was the point... you can't postulate that everything complex needs a creator and then say that God wasn't created, the contradiction voids the point.

I'm sorry Dur, but I never said that everything complex needs a creator. I would say. Anything that BEGINS to exist, that is complex, MAY need a creator. The reason why I disagree with Jim's argument is that reason. He did not get proper info, mis-reps what Christians BELIEVE on this issue, passes that mis rep as truth, and builds an argument to go against his mis rep. That's where my issue lies. Do you understand that now?

Crystal

[lilpixieofterror]

The paradox of omnipotence was never meant to disprove the idea of an inteligent designer - it is meant to prove that a being cannot exist which is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, because if it were all of these things there would be no suffering.

Why? because you said so? What do you have besides opinion to support this?

You have to reject (or at least tone down) one of these aspects of your view of God, else hold a contradictory view of the world.

I already gave a view that allows that. You are more than welcome to disagree, but without proof of your claims (or using your own opinion to hold it up). I have zero reason to believe you, simple as that.

Why can't we criticize it?

You are more than welcome to. But you need evidence, not speculation.

Wouldn't it have been easier to create creatures that would not 'fall' in the first place then to do so, then whip up a 'rescue plan' to save them?

Sure, he could of created a world of robots. Instead God choose to create a world which we are allowed to choose our own path. What do you want? A world where you can choose to follow God or not. Or a world were you are a mindless robot, programed to follow your creator.

Because if God is omniscient, He would have seen that, in the future, these creatures would fall into sin, and could have fixed the faults before He created them.

Sure, by making us into mindless zombies and forcing himself upon us. That does not seem to be the world God wanted (Forced love, is not love at all). So what is God to do to allow free choice, the pleasures of love, happiness or other emotions, and not to force himself upon others? The world here (with all of it's ups and downs) seems to be the best way to accomplish these goals. I've asked you time and time again to come up with a world that would accomplish these goals and be suffer free. So far you have not given anything pratical.

Crystal

[Jim E.]

2. I follow the evidence where it leads.

Now this is what I’m talking about when I refer to the dark side of Christianity. We’ve seen how you’ve behaved in this forum. Your “god” employs suffering. Suffering is called evidence, Crystal. You couldn’t get clearer evidence that God is not all good. You talk about human parents allowing their children to suffer. Ooh, let me try, Crystal.

Point I want to be true: If I don’t want to go to work Monday, I’ll still get paid!

Counter: People who don’t go to work get fired.

Stubbornness: I know a lot of people who won’t get fired on Monday! In fact, almost everybody won’t get fired on Monday! That was true last Monday, the Monday before that, and the Monday before that! Clearly I am right!

Counter: Um, errr, hmmm. Those people went to work.

Stubbornness: The point is that they didn’t get fired.

The thing is, Crystal, you face no current consequences for your stubbornness. You’ve already admitted that your faith costs you nothing. That’s actually good. At least Christianity isn’t wasting your life. I’d bet there are many people out there who would like to know Christianity is false. And people like you help to keep the truth from them.

We say the unverse is complex, begin to exist at a certian point, and everything we know that begins to exist that is complex, has a creator.

The “science” of Christians is a very dark side of Christianity. Last I checked, scientists merely couldn’t see what happened before the big bang. And I think they’re even working on theories for that. No science says the universe popped into existence from nothing. Gee, what do you know, a Christian dead wrong about science. Yeah, that’s never happened before….

[lilpixieofterror]

Now this is what I’m talking about when I refer to the dark side of Christianity.

My my... still can't answer me nor prove me wrong. So now you are going to attempt to change the subject. Nice slight of hand...

We’ve seen how you’ve behaved in this forum.

Yep, giving sound logical arguments and watching you fail time after time answer them. Such bad behavor.

Your “god” employs suffering.

In certian situations yes, you still have yet to prove how this is evil or what type of suffering you are refering to.

Suffering is called evidence, Crystal.

No it isn't, you still have not answered:

1. Why is God unloving for it?
2. Who creates most of the suffering in this world?
3. Why does suffering disprove a loving God. Does suffering disprove loving parents too?

Please answer me.

You couldn’t get clearer evidence that God is not all good.

What is your 'defination of good and bad' if you don't mind me asking. Parents make their kids suffer, so loving parents do not exist, prove me wrong.

You talk about human parents allowing their children to suffer. Ooh, let me try, Crystal.

That's great that you did not answer a single point I made with that nonsense you posted. How does this disprove my argument that parents are not loving for letting children being born?

The thing is, Crystal, you face no current consequences for your stubbornness.

And you have no proof that I am stubborn. That 'I don't want to go to work thing.' Sorry, did not answer one point I made. It appears you are trying some slight of hand (so to speak) here. Sorry, I'm not going to look at your left hand and ignore what your right hand is doing

You’ve already admitted that your faith costs you nothing.

I have admitted it hasn't cost me my life or I have been beatten for it. Love to warp things, don't ya?

That’s actually good. At least Christianity isn’t wasting your life.

Awww, still stuck in your delusions. Hope that serves you well.

I’d bet there are many people out there who would like to know Christianity is false. And people like you help to keep the truth from them.

You haven't proven a thing little one. I have given you chance after chance to answer me, just to see you avoid me and not answer. This is your chance, prove Christianity is false.

The “science” of Christians is a very dark side of Christianity.

Oh yeah... pastorized milk is so evil! Sterilaziation is so Evil! Oh, let's not forget Soy Plastics and the viarity of discoverys made by such people as George Washington Carver or Louis Pastur. Keep in your delusions may they serve you well.

Last I checked, scientists merely couldn’t see what happened before the big bang.

Your point?

And I think they’re even working on theories for that.

There are several theories that I'm aware of. Know of any of them... I do

No science says the universe popped into existence from nothing.

Sorry, never said that. Keep mis-reping me every chance you get.

Gee, what do you know, a Christian dead wrong about science.

Care to tell us one of these theories? I knew quite a few of them and know some reasons why they are flawed. Simply speaking... I read science books and I'm an amature scienctist.

Yeah, that’s never happened before….

Yep, keep saying that while you drink pastorized milk, looking at a round globe, while reading the '3 laws of motion' (just so you are aware, all of those things were developed by Christian scientist )

Crystal

[Jim E.]

It’s always entertaining to see a Christian call black white. As I’ve said many times before, talk is cheap. As for me, I’ll stick to calling black black. And perhaps that’s all that needs to be said. Good day.

[lilpixieofterror]

It’s always entertaining to see a Christian call black white.

It's always entertaining to see you not answer me and tell us WHY suffering can not exist with a loving God. Keep running

As I’ve said many times before, talk is cheap.

Indeed it is, that's why I do things to help others. I'm a Big Sister in the Big Brothers and Big Sisters org. I also spend my time and money doing other community service projects thoughout the city I live in. What do you do to help those in need?

As for me, I’ll stick to calling black black.

Yep, while you ignore everything I say and pretend you have 'won' anything. Keep it up.

And perhaps that’s all that needs to be said. Good day.

Wow, not going to be a hyprocrite this time? I'm impressed, maybe you are learning.

Crystal