RE: I renounce Christianity

RE: I renounce Christianity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

TreasureKY -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 8:48:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It seems to me that the fundamental claim under discussion here is: The existence of evil is incompatible with the Christian version of an omnipotent God of pure goodness who created the world and everything in it. To me it's a fairly simple claim to test: If evil exists, then someone or something is responsible for its existence. The only two possibilities are (1) God created/is responsible for the existence of evil; or (2) something other than God created/is responsible for the existence of evil: (1) If God created everything, then that God must have created/be responsible for the existence of evil too. A god of pure goodness could not create evil. Therefore the claim is valid. (2) If evil exists and God didn't create it, then that God cannot be the creator of all things. Therfore the claim is valid. No matter which way it's cut, the existence of evil is incompatible with the standard Christian version of God. Oh well... I'm so glad that we have your final word to clear this all up for us. [8\|]

Kaliko -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 8:51:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It seems to me that the fundamental claim under discussion here is: The existence of evil is incompatible with the Christian version of an omnipotent God of pure goodness who created the world and everything in it. To me it's a fairly simple claim to test: If evil exists, then someone or something is responsible for its existence. The only two possibilities are (1) God created/is responsible for the existence of evil; or (2) something other than God created/is responsible for the existence of evil: (1) If God created everything, then that God must have created/be responsible for the existence of evil too. A god of pure goodness could not create evil. Therefore the claim is valid. (2) If evil exists and God didn't create/isn't responsible for it, then that God cannot be the creator of all things. Therefore the claim is valid. No matter which way it's cut, the existence of evil is incompatible with the standard Christian version of God. Seems like a logical argument to me. ETA - never mind. I thought immediately after posting "Wait - is the standard Christian version of God that of a loving God?" and then figured that was probably covered already. So..never mind.

Real0ne -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:04:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko I find, as I get older, that all those people who told me "You're too young to understand" were absolutely right. i find, as modern people are "living" more in a shorter span of time, that this phrase increasingly loses validity. it's become more of a rallying cry for older people who want to maintain some boundary to define their self-ascribed superiority. or those who are honest with you.

tazzygirl -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:06:23 PM)
If you dont agree with them, you are a liar.

Real0ne -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:11:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It seems to me that the fundamental claim under discussion here is: The existence of evil is incompatible with the Christian version of an omnipotent God of pure goodness who created the world and everything in it. To me it's a fairly simple claim to test: If evil exists, then someone or something is responsible for its existence. The only two possibilities I see are (1) God created/is responsible for the existence of evil; or (2) something other than God created/is responsible for the existence of evil: (1) If God created everything, then that God must have created/be responsible for the existence of evil too. A god of pure goodness could not create evil. Therefore the claim is valid. (2) If evil exists and God didn't create/isn't responsible for it, then that God cannot be the creator of all things. Therefore the claim is valid. No matter which way it's cut, the existence of evil is incompatible with the standard Christian version of God. the problem you are faced with is that there is no neutral in the good and evil argument. If its not bad then its good and neutral would fall into the not bad slot and if its not bad then it cannot be evil.

LafayetteLady -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:12:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko I find, as I get older, that all those people who told me "You're too young to understand" were absolutely right. i find, as modern people are "living" more in a shorter span of time, that this phrase increasingly loses validity. it's become more of a rallying cry for older people who want to maintain some boundary to define their self-ascribed superiority. People aren't "living" more in a shorter period of time, they are engaging in activities that they usually didn't engage in until later in life. There are a great many things that young people will not understand until they are older. It is kind of like when someone who is childless (at any age) talks about how to raise a child or tells a parent all the things they are doing that is wrong. They really haven't a clue until they have a child. There are a great number of parents who one day say something to their kids and have a head slap moment when they realize they just said something their parents always said they would say and they swore they wouldn't. There are experiences in life that just come with age. When I was a teenager, I kept a journal. I wrote poetry, my thoughts, my anger, everything essentially. I believe I still have it in a box somewhere (at least I hope I do). Every time I move (which is far too frequently these last couple years), I tend to find it when I unpack and always have to sit and skim through it. I'm always amazed at some of the things that really brought me great anguish at that time. I think "really? How could some so silly bother me so much?" All because I have grown up and had far worse experiences. As a parent, I was amazed at how "stupid" I became when my son turned thirteen. That was when he felt the need to constantly tell me that I didn't know anything about anything. Now he is a parent himself, and before my grandmother was born, I talked with him about some things. I asked him when his daughter was a teenager, and she told him she didn't need to tell him where he was going, how would he respond. I nearly peed my pants laughing when he said that she would have a cell phone with GPS so he could track her every movement. This from the child who, from the age of 14, told me that he was "grown up enough" to not have to tell me where he was going. We all change when we are older. You have experienced the profound loss of a loved one. Don't you think that has altered your outlook on life somewhat? Don't you believe you have a knowledge that others your age who haven't suffered such a loss can benefit from your advice when it happens to them? The beauty of youth is that from puberty to about 25 or so, we think we know far more than those older than us, and those older than us just don't understand (as though we crawled out from under a rock as old and decrepit as we are now). Then life changes and we realize that not only do we not know everything, we know very little. Yes, some people like you and the OP have suffered some horrible tragedies that have brought you more knowledge sooner than you should have had to go through it. That isn't being demeaning or an attempt at superiority. That is sadness that a part of your youth was colored by something you shouldn't have had to endure until later. Playing the "age card" is rarely an attempt to show superiority. It is trying to help young people navigate through things without having to suffer some of the same mistakes that we did.

SuzeCheri -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:23:03 PM)
Ok, I reviewed all the links you sent me, and not one of them in anyway refutes the notion of God (omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, and just) that I say cannot be reconciled with reality, so those links seem to confirm that the model is the Christian model. In addition I checked out this page ( https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Creeds#Christian_creeds ) on various Christian creeds, and checked the wording of each in the main articles linked on the page, and not one denied in anyway the model I am calling the Christian model. Again, if you know of any Christian denomination that rejects the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, and just model of God, then please tell me about it. I would like to know if such a group existed and learn more about it.

Real0ne -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:23:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If you dont agree with them, you are a liar. well when I was a very young kid, (about 7 maybe, my fav argument (faulty as theirs) was the heaven and hell argument. If heaven is up and hell is down, (which is the way it was always stated to kids), I concluded that all the chinese were going to hell or hell must be in the center of the earth. I look back and laugh.

LafayetteLady -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:27:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SuzeCheri First of all, thank you for the links, I will check them out. quote: My personal religious beliefs have no dogma that is contradictory or impossible. Then your personal religious beliefs are at variance with the teachings of Christianity, just as are mine. quote: I have given myself as evidence that I am a Christian but do not adhere to your idea of the nature of God. Not my idea of the nature of God, but that of the Christian religion. That is the whole point of this thread, that I reject Christianity because I do not share that idea of the nature of God. quote: I have given myself as evidence that I am a Christian but do not adhere to your idea of the nature of God. Again, not my idea, and if you don't share your religion's idea of the nature of God, then you really aren't that firm an adherent are you? Now, if your church doesn't hold that god is all-knowing and all-powerful, and a loving, caring, and just god, then please tell me which denomination that is, I really would be interested in learning more. quote: As has been pointed out in this thread, your questioning is not new. Your apostasy is not new. Man has pondered and argued these very concepts for centuries. I never said it was new, nor does that make it invalid. In fact, if you ask me, the fact that so many wiser and more learned people than me have been pointing out these inconsistencies in Christian doctrine for centuries really only goes to show how real they are. Just a question, and Treasure pointed this out earlier, but I guess you missed it or the relevance of it. You say that you haven't rejected the idea of God's existence. Do you believe that Jesus existed and was the son of God? I am what is commonly referred to as a "born again Christian." I'm often met with shocked faces when I tell people that. Why? Because there is a common misbelief that being "born again" means that one runs around preaching the bible and trying to convert everyone. Yes, sadly, there are many that do that. I'm obviously not one of them. The fact is that to be "born again" means nothing more and nothing less than that you believe in God, that Jesus was the son of God and died on the cross for all of our sins. That along with the fact that as a person who has reached an age of understanding (old enough to make some decisions basically, so figure somewhere over the age of 10 or so), that you can make that proclamation of your own free will. So if you do believe those three things, guess what? You are still a Christian. One that doesn't believe in organized religion, or feel a need to feel the bible is the be all/end all of organized Christianity, but Christian all the same. Catholics to this day are not accepting of divorce, birth control, homosexuality or divorce, although there are some "modern" Catholic churches that aren't so rigid. Many Catholics are homosexual, use birth control, have had an abortion or gotten divorced. That doesn't make them "less" Catholic. My point is, that if you choose to, you can be Christian and still not hold to every tenent that your Catholic upbringing or some other religion ascribes to. As mentioned earlier, although I am Christian, I don't believe my way is the only "true" way, and believe that when I die, in Heaven I will find people of all religions living happily together without all this arguing over which faith is right or wrong. No, I wasn't taught that in a Bible Study Group, it was a conclusion I reached myself, and it doesn't change the fact that I am still a Christian. I had an aunt who was VERY born again (raised Catholic and it probably made her mother spin in her grave). She also was very active if writing in her church's newsletter/pamphlets. We had a discussion once about attending church and where one "should" pray. She was very open about the fact that attending church was certainly not "required" and that if you felt closest to God while sitting on the toilet and that is where you prayed, it didn't matter. In her opinion, as long as you reached out to God, that was all that matters.

tazzygirl -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:29:16 PM)
Well, damn, everyone must conform to a certain "model" if you call yourself a christian. Interesting....

Cherylmazana -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:31:41 PM)
General reply Religions were created and written by man, every single one of them. All of them expect you to believe that their version is the right one and that others are wrong and yet none of them provide facts, they all expect you to have faith instead. God by whatever name you know him and also Satan again by whatever name you know him are constructs created by man to explain what they can’t explain. Along the way other things get added in to also explain whatever those writing at the time can’t understand. If there is a God or creator I doubt he is anything like any of the religions, and I don’t expect him to spend all his time looking after me and mine I expect he has much better things to do than that. The world works in ways I understand, land masses move and so earthquakes, tsunamis etc happen, people deforest areas so we have mudslides, you live on a flood plain so you get water washing away your home and family, that’s not God that’s simply global mechanics and also common sense. It’s the same with drive by killings, drunken drivers crimes of passion etc. People are not nice they have to be taught as children to control their temper, taught to share, taught not to be greedy, and taught to help others. When that fails or they are taught by example to lie, steal, kill etc, is right then that’s what they will do. Don’t blame it on a God who may or may not exist. Cheryl

LafayetteLady -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:34:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep you're also assuming that people WOULDN'T invent those things just because there weren't so many successive generations. you have no way to know that. it's perfectly possible that immortality would remove the need to worry so much about immediate success, leaving legacies, etc. and would instead foster a new kind of curiosity. who's to say we wouldn't be MORE advanced, not less, if time spent making us live longer was instead devoted to making us live better? or just to interesting passing fancies that could be given more time because time wasn't an issue anymore? Actually, I'm saying that the inventors of those things would not have existed in the first place, because if reproduction became less of an issue, it would have been thousands of years ago and so everyone here and people like Edison, Ford and Bell wouldn't have ever been born. I'm also still asserting that the earth would be so full of people because unless people just landed on the earth fully grown, there would still be a need to reproduce, and babies would be born and as they grew up, they would likely want to reproduce as well. In other words, I'm presenting questions/problems with the concept of immortality for all.

tazzygirl -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:34:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cherylmazana General reply Religions were created and written by man, every single one of them. All of them expect you to believe that their version is the right one and that others are wrong and yet none of them provide facts, they all expect you to have faith instead. God by whatever name you know him and also Satan again by whatever name you know him are constructs created by man to explain what they can’t explain. Along the way other things get added in to also explain whatever those writing at the time can’t understand. If there is a God or creator I doubt he is anything like any of the religions, and I don’t expect him to spend all his time looking after me and mine I expect he has much better things to do than that. The world works in ways I understand, land masses move and so earthquakes, tsunamis etc happen, people deforest areas so we have mudslides, you live on a flood plain so you get water washing away your home and family, that’s not God that’s simply global mechanics and also common sense. It’s the same with drive by killings, drunken drivers crimes of passion etc. People are not nice they have to be taught as children to control their temper, taught to share, taught not to be greedy, and taught to help others. When that fails or they are taught by example to lie, steal, kill etc, is right then that’s what they will do. Don’t blame it on a God who may or may not exist. Cheryl [sm=applause.gif]

SuzeCheri -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:35:48 PM)
quote: If you never knew what sadness felt like, you also wouldn't know what happiness felt like. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It just is illogical, irrational, and nonsensical. None of the rest of what you posted in any way makes death a requirement for life. None of it shows that death is required nor that it in any way enhances life. Sorry, but it is all irrelevant. If you want to discuss the possible ramifications of immortality, then I suggest you follow FirmhandKY's advice and start a thread on the topic. I won't be discussing it further on this thread.

tazzygirl -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:37:34 PM)
About as illogical, irrational, and nonsensical as you calling me a liar when you didnt know what you were talking about. Must be that age thing again.

SuzeCheri -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:38:47 PM)
That's too bad. Not that you believe that, I think that is a wonderful way to see things, but it's a pity it wasn't the official view of some church or other.

LillyBoPeep -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:38:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Actually, I'm saying that the inventors of those things would not have existed in the first place, because if reproduction became less of an issue, it would have been thousands of years ago and so everyone here and people like Edison, Ford and Bell wouldn't have ever been born. that's surely possible that THOSE specific people wouldn't have existed, but i find it hard to believe that no one else would have ever had a similar workable idea. so the lack of the existence of these specific people still doesn't prove to me that we'd be so behind. someone else would have thought up something similar. maybe not the exact same thing, but sheesh, even Edison had Tesla to compete with. they weren't divinely inspired, working in bubbles. quote: I'm also still asserting that the earth would be so full of people because unless people just landed on the earth fully grown, there would still be a need to reproduce, and babies would be born and as they grew up, they would likely want to reproduce as well. In other words, I'm presenting questions/problems with the concept of immortality for all. that's also possible, but maybe by this time, people would've invested science elsewhere and learned to colonize places outside of our planet? and a reduction in reproduction isn't necessarily a bad thing. the human race is getting close to overtaking the carrying capacity of our planet now -- having fewer people might not be so bad. you're basing your conclusions off of (what seems to me) an idea that what we're doing exactly now is preferred and "right," and maybe it's not.

Aynne88 -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:40:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cherylmazana General reply Religions were created and written by man, every single one of them. All of them expect you to believe that their version is the right one and that others are wrong and yet none of them provide facts, they all expect you to have faith instead. God by whatever name you know him and also Satan again by whatever name you know him are constructs created by man to explain what they can’t explain. Along the way other things get added in to also explain whatever those writing at the time can’t understand. If there is a God or creator I doubt he is anything like any of the religions, and I don’t expect him to spend all his time looking after me and mine I expect he has much better things to do than that. The world works in ways I understand, land masses move and so earthquakes, tsunamis etc happen, people deforest areas so we have mudslides, you live on a flood plain so you get water washing away your home and family, that’s not God that’s simply global mechanics and also common sense. It’s the same with drive by killings, drunken drivers crimes of passion etc. People are not nice they have to be taught as children to control their temper, taught to share, taught not to be greedy, and taught to help others. When that fails or they are taught by example to lie, steal, kill etc, is right then that’s what they will do. Don’t blame it on a God who may or may not exist. Cheryl Bravo. Oh,and I am an atheist. [;)]. Well said Cheryl.

Kirata -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:43:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The existence of evil is incompatible with the Christian version of an omnipotent God of pure goodness who created the world and everything in it. To me it's a fairly simple claim to test It's only a fairly simple claim to test if you stack the deck to suit your own definition of "good" so that you can pull exactly the rabbit you want out of the hat. The (hidden) definition of good in this deck is "perfect." A world that is "good" is a world in which a fundamental and inescapable moral rightness prevails. It does not require that evil never occur, it requires that it be punished. The fact that evil is not always punished (or good rewarded) here on Earth requires a vision that holds our lives to be embedded in and subject to a greater reality in which those rewards and punishments inescapably accrue, which is precisely (and not only) Christian doctrine. Thank you, next act. K.

Real0ne -> RE: I renounce Christianity (10/1/2011 9:49:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SuzeCheri quote: If you never knew what sadness felt like, you also wouldn't know what happiness felt like. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It just is illogical, irrational, and nonsensical. On the contrary she is bang on and you have shown that you skipped metaphysics 101 class, not to mention contradicted yourself with reference to your own options theory. You want 3 and that is generally valid but now you are discounting 2 and off the top nothing jumps at me as not having an anti or opposite. How do you know what a pin prick feels like if you never felt it? You have no reference. Several out here, treasure, LL, taz and others are pointing out fundamental flaws in your constructs and benevolently trying to help you prevent building for yourself a house of cards.

Page: << < prev 16 17 [18] 19 20 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125