« First « Previous Comments 9 - 47 of 47 Search these comments
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
Correct, the question is just an philosophical exercise based on hypothetical assumptions.
Good: that which contributes to the sustainability of future Life.
Evil: Actions taken based on unquestioned beliefs that subtract from future resources (social stability is a resource, too).
The answer to your question is.....(drumroll)....
Humanity.
God and Satan are constructs of human models of the universe. Sometimes they are used to gather people for useful projects that benefit the future, and sometimes to enact evil systems of unquestionable dogma that harms the future.
There is no difference in this light between God, Satan, and Free Market Capitalism. None of which are inherently good or evil, but are used in good and evil ways by human beings who work to extract more from the future of the universe than they contribute to it.
The biggest Blind Faith is that this will result in something useful because of the power of the Invisible Hand Job: an entity which does not exist except in the words of those defending evil acts of extraction: just as those who go to war in the name of their particular god.
The biggest evil is UNQUESTIONED Belief (whether it is in God, Government, Gurus, Gold or Guns).
The biggest evil is UNQUESTIONED Belief (whether it is in God, Government, Gurus, Gold or Guns).
NICE.
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
Correct, the question is just an philosophical exercise based on hypothetical assumptions.
Uh, actually, I'd take that statement even FURTHER by adding that both entities have been proven to NOT exist.
They need to delete "probably"
They need to delete "probably"
Actually, to be truthful, you can't.
The reasoning which says you must is the same unjustified certainty that says the statement is false.
We have found 7 billion universes...and they are us.
Now, we just have to figure out how to get most of them to be at least a little bit like the actual universe.
A religious model of the universe was an old-fashioned way that worked to some extent. The modern scientific model of the universe is another way, but both must be questioned for the models they are. The difference between religion and science is that (honest)science welcomes the questions. Honest religion does, too: but you gotta find one, and it probably isn't the one your parents stuffed in your teddy bear.
Questioning the models is what keeps us grounded to the real world and real needs. Success in the models breeds certainty in beliefs and contempt and ignorance of reality, because we generally credit our imagination and its forethought with our success, rather than the luck or risks of reality and randomness. (see "Fooled by Randomness" -Nassim Taleb)
never say never....
why throw away man's ability to hallucinate?
leoj707 says
xrpb11a says
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
Correct, the question is just an philosophical exercise based on hypothetical assumptions.
Uh, actually, I'd take that statement even FURTHER by adding that both entities have been proven to NOT exist.
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
True but we can judge what is said of him.
Many believe him real and good but you notice that no one speaks for him because the message is getting out that God is a prick.
Regards
DL
FACT: The Christian Old Testament is simply the Jewish Torah with the chapters arranged in a different order so as to highlight the otherwise unremarkable prediction of an allegedly "soon to come" messiah (which actually only means "messenger" and NOT "savior").
Well put. I hope you take your knowledge to many Christians. They are in sorry need.
Christianity would be well advised to reverse their interpretations of Jewish works that they put on them when they usurped the Jewish God without his Jewish understanding and interpretations of their own myths.
Regards
DL
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
Correct, the question is just an philosophical exercise based on hypothetical assumptions.
Uh, actually, I'd take that statement even FURTHER by adding that both entities have been proven to NOT exist.
I do not disagree but would just point out that non-believers should not use the same poor and definitive language that we criticize believers for using.
We should all know that a negative cannot be proven so your statement is wrong when you say that Satan or God have been proven not to exist. That is just as much of a lie as Christians saying that God exists.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/XyA8cIzosFU
Regards
DL
The biggest evil is UNQUESTIONED Belief (whether it is in God, Government, Gurus, Gold or Guns).
No argument and well put.
If it is all just human to human as you say, then as we evolve we must either cooperate or compete and we must do both to survive.
Cooperation would be seen as good and competition as evil from the losers POV.
I cannot see how we cannot do evil or compete if we are to maintain the survival of the fittest.
If we stop doing evil IOW, we go extinct.
See it?
Regards
DL
They need to delete "probably"
Please read my reply to Game over.
We do not want to use poor language the way believers do.
Regards
DL
I do not disagree but would just point out that non-believers should not use the same poor and definitive language that we criticize believers for using.
We should all know that a negative cannot be proven so your statement is wrong when you say that Satan or God have been proven not to exist. That is just as much of a lie as Christians saying that God exists.
The same goes for the tooth fairy, boogey man, and the million beliefs that have come and gone. That reduces us to a world where all those beliefs could be true. That would be a very non intellectual world.
Why not keep it simple....agree to disagree, and everyone entitled to their beliefs as long as no one gets hurt.
Raw
They need to delete "probably"
Please read my reply to Game over.
We do not want to use poor language the way believers do.
Regards
DL
If I let others do my thinking I would have been religious.
No thanks.
I do not disagree but would just point out that non-believers should not use the same poor and definitive language that we criticize believers for using.
We should all know that a negative cannot be proven so your statement is wrong when you say that Satan or God have been proven not to exist. That is just as much of a lie as Christians saying that God exists.
The same goes for the tooth fairy, boogey man, and the million beliefs that have come and gone. That reduces us to a world where all those beliefs could be true. That would be a very non intellectual world.
Why not keep it simple....agree to disagree, and everyone entitled to their beliefs as long as no one gets hurt.
Raw
Parents eventually give their children the facts of the imaginary constructs we adults use to rear children.
In religious fantasy's, we do not.
That is the main difference and the cause of our problems.
If you want to sound as foolish as believers and use inapropriate, un-provable and definitive language that they can attack you on, then by all means keep on using it. It just opens you to useless attacks.
Regards
DL
They need to delete "probably"
Please read my reply to Game over.
We do not want to use poor language the way believers do.
Regards
DL
If I let others do my thinking I would have been religious.
No thanks.
I do not care who does your thinking. It is your poor presentation that I question. Stop lying. You make non-believers as stupid as believers.
Regards
DL
God knows everything in advance
I'm having trouble finding this in my Bible. Please give the book and chapter found in a King James version. Thanks.
You are all going to Hell-- although Hell can't be all that bad. I hear people are literally dying to get in.
God knows everything in advance
I'm having trouble finding this in my Bible. Please give the book and chapter found in a King James version. Thanks.
Dogma says omni-present, all knowing, transcends time etc. etc. etc.
Regards
DL
so, you are admitting that the Holy Ancient Text does not say what you say it says ... but you have heard or read that a bunch of old people in robes say something is true that is not backed by Holy text .... and you choose to focus on the words of the old people in robes, and not on the text (Hebrew, Sumer, ect)??? That does not match your normal process of doing things.
The Holy text says, God counted every hair on your head, and I believe it.
I can't recall any Holy text that suggests God altered the required environment for Free Will to be applicable. The Angles were given Free Will first. If there is to be a choice of "good", then there must be a choice of "evil". Just as there had to be "darkness" inorder for God to make "light". Up and down, left and right, positive and negative, CCW and CW angular momentum, mass and void, .... I guess it would be easiest to say that God created oposites. A choice of good requires a choice of evil, and vice versa. The accountablity of the chooser is predicated against knowledge of truth, good, evil. The "simple", or ignorant, have no accountability - but you and I sure do.
The "simple", or ignorant, have no accountability - but you and I sure do.
I agree.
Not so with your belief in fantasy and supernatural entities.
We will not likely agree that you follow a fantasy so how about a moral and judgement question. Is God insane?
It was God's plan from the beginning to have Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit. This can be demonstrated by the fact that the bible says that Jesus "was crucified from the foundations of the Earth," that is to say, God planned to crucify Jesus as atonement for sin before he even created human beings or God damned sin.
If God had not intended humans to sin from the beginning, why did he build into the Creation this "solution" for sin? Why create a solution for a problem you do not anticipate?
God knew that the moment he said "don't eat from that tree," the die was cast. The eating was inevitable. Eve was merely following the plan.
This then begs the question.
What kind of God would plan and execute the murder of his own son when there was absolutely no need to?
Only an insane God. That’s who.
The cornerstone of Christianity is human sacrifice, thus showing it‘s immorality.
One of Christianity's highest form of immorality is what they have done to women.
They have denied them equality and subjugated them to men.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/jqN8EYIIR3g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/embed/9dspWh9g3hU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/embed/9c0RFxXrYzg&feature=related
Regards
DL
They need to delete "probably"
Please read my reply to Game over.
We do not want to use poor language the way believers do.
Regards
DL
If I let others do my thinking I would have been religious.
No thanks.
I do not care who does your thinking. It is your poor presentation that I question. Stop lying. You make non-believers as stupid as believers.
Regards
DL
Slither away psycho.
I disagree with this entire thread, but as the only intelligent post was by Auntiegrav and all the rest were just atheist regurgitation, I see no purpose to entering an argument with the ignorant. So many untrue things have been said so far that it would take hours to correct them all, and the bet result would be simply more uneducated derision.
I'll just say this: the debate over if, what, and who God is complex. Except for the above mentioned poster, nobody else has demonstrated the level of thought necessary to have such a debate.
I cannot see how we cannot do evil or compete if we are to maintain the survival of the fittest.
If we stop doing evil IOW, we go extinct.
See it?
Regards
DL
Yes, I see your point and understand it, but you are mistaken about how evolution works.
"Survival of the fittest" doesn't mean the strongest or the fastest, etc.: it means that those who fit their environment will survive. The strongest/fastest/most productive are what I refer to as the "mean Mean": the middle of the bell curve. When the environment changes, they do not "evolve" to become fit for that environment. They die and those fringe offspring which were already adapted by randomness to that new niche are the ones that survive ("the meek shall inherit"). This is why diversity is more important than quantity. The "winners" make matters actually worse because they force the shape of the bell curve into a spike (i.e. a population spike based on an abundant but probably limited resource such as petroleum), and try to kill or marginalize those who don't fall into their idea of "perfection" (for that very narrow niche).
The cooperation we must understand is not among ourselves, but with reality and all of the other living things that provide the resources our future selves will need to survive. We cannot "conquer" nature because it is us.
So many untrue things have been said so far that it would take hours to correct them all, and the bet result would be simply more uneducated derision.
I'll just say this: the debate over if, what, and who God is complex.
A humble (not really) Thank You, Q.
I participate in these discussions because I enjoy the entertainment aspect of other people's models of the world, and try to seek some usefulness in their perspectives and perhaps even cooperation toward a better idea and meme of what value humans can add to the future. It is also why I dropped out of the atheist discussion groups some time ago. The competition is a sideshow to the needs of real people in a real world that includes religious behaviors and sometimes, even religious beliefs(I find nothing wrong with people who go to church for the donuts and the gossip). Usefulness is usefulness, and our actions toward improving things can take place under many guises, and tools can be used in different ways. The key is knowing whether you are using the tool or the tool is using you.
Auntiegrav
We are on the same evolution page.
I agree that atheists must improve on their apologetics.
So must believers if they want to reduce their present losses but I do not see them getting better.
The reverse is what I see.
It is all about their level of knowledge or lack of it.
Regards
DL
No, you cannot.
The subject ends at the failure of proof.
xrpb11a says
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
True but we can judge what is said of him
Auntiegrav
We are on the same evolution page.
I agree that atheists must improve on their apologetics.
So must believers if they want to reduce their present losses but I do not see them getting better.
The reverse is what I see.
It is all about their level of knowledge or lack of it.
Regards
DL
Well said. The most ignorant and simplistic people of any religion always seem to be the most zealous when challenged.
Likewise with the Atheists. Their zeal is often more extreme than the very religious zealots they rail against!
I was raised ultra conservative Christian.
At this point, I've come to believe, that clearly the god I was brought up to believe in created evil, if he indeed exists.
And so I believe.... that god is either evil, dead, incompetent, or non-existent.
I have no proof
Neither do you
I don't push my beliefs on anyone.
I can take "facts" all day long, and make a case for Christianity, Atheism, Islam, Buddhism, Catholicism, etc.
I feel like I'm ahead of the curve as an Agnostic.
I don't know.
Hundreds of millions of people have died because "they know"
What a waste
No, you cannot.
The subject ends at the failure of proof.
xrpb11a says
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
True but we can judge what is said of him
It is said that intelligent men can discuss what they do not believe to be true but if you cannot, I understand.
I agree that without proof, anything said about God is speculative nonsense but that does not mean we cannot judge what is written about this fictitious character.
Regards
DL
Go ahead. Pump yourself up and bloviate to your heart's content.
xrpb11a says
No, you cannot.
The subject ends at the failure of proof.
Greatest I am says
xrpb11a says
The question is unanswerable, since neither entity can be proven to exist.
True but we can judge what is said of him
It is said that intelligent men can discuss what they do not believe to be true but if you cannot, I understand.
Neither do you
Exactly right for most.
Almost in my case but not to the miracle working absentee God.
For most, there is no proof. Without apotheosis or contact with the unknown and unseen, there can be no proof and even with apotheosis, there is nothing to show others. That is why I do not push for belief and neither should anyone else.
As a Gnostic Christian, I unfortunately fall into this last.
It does not usually stop non-believers from getting along with me as our moral positions are about the same.
Some few atheist will not allow me this and to them I am as far into the woo as those who believe in the supernatural even though the Godhead I know is just a part of nature.
Such is life. An easy cross for me to cary.
Regards
DL
I lean toward God as scriptures name him the Alpha and Omega which to me means the best and the worse.
nope. It means the begining and the end. A closed system loop feedback. That's why energy/matter is not created, just changes.... Closed Loop.
I lean toward God as scriptures name him the Alpha and Omega which to me means the best and the worse.
nope. It means the begining and the end. A closed system loop feedback. That's why energy/matter is not created, just changes.... Closed Loop.
Google it and you will see that that term is given much more in terms of interpretation and attributes.
Regardless, accepting your definition would still not effect the outcome of the O P's question.
Regards
DL
your original post was wrong. Ancient text did not decide to name God anything, God gave the text writers insight into who God is by telling them, "I am the I Am, I am the Alpha, and the Omega" .. but, we both know God never spoke those words, as God did not speak Greek to the Sumerians or Hebrews or Arabs when he gave them clues as to His personage ... and your next question will be, "why did God worry about telling manwho He was?", and the answer is, man asked. God was saying, to be really simple about it, "I have always been, and I always will be."
Want to know what's really cool? You and I have always been and shall always be too. We are of God. Cool huh?
Saying I am wrong is not proving I am wrong.
We are Gods for sure. In the sense that we are all star stuff, yes.
Being a Gnostic Christian I know we are more but I have no proof to show and do not push for belief.
Star stuff does not threaten with eternal punishment if we do not do as it tells us to do.
Regards
DL
Nothing as compared with God and his genocide.
But I do hear you and do not disagree that all men, not just the U S, must smarten up.
Regards
DL
God knows everything in advance
I'm having trouble finding this in my Bible. Please give the book and chapter found in a King James version. Thanks.
Well, the bible makes the omnipotence of god very clear. In fact there is a passage that comes out and says so:
Revilation 19:6: And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.
We all know that omnipotence means unlimited power, but does this mean that god can “know everything in advance� One would imminently think that a being with infinite power could do anything including see into the future and know all things that are going to happen. While the bible does not specifically mention that god is omniscient there are several other passages that would seem to indicate that god is.
Matthew 19:26: But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
…and…
Mark 10:27: And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.
Hmmm…saying twice that “all things are possible†makes it seem pretty important. Seeing into the future is a “thing†so I would think that is possible for god.
Luke 1:37: For with God nothing shall be impossible.
Is knowing everything in advance impossible for god? Not according to Luke!
Job 42:2: I know that thou canst do every thing, and that no thought can be withholden from thee.
Yep, looks like Job agrees that god can do everything. To me that would include seeing all things that are to happen.
John 3:20: For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
Now this sounds a lot like an omniscient god to me. I would think that “all things†knowethed would include all future events.
Bap, I hope these passages help you to understand god and the bible a little better.
More like knowing all the attributes that man has given to what is supposed to be an unfathomable God.
Strange how only Christians can fathom the unfathomable.
I call that delusion.
Regards
DL
« First « Previous Comments 9 - 47 of 47 Search these comments
Does the award for the greatest evil go to Satan or God?
Many blame Satan for the evils of this world even as his power to deceive all of us comes from God.
As the creator of Satan, many think that God deserves the blame as he knew what Satan would be because God knows everything in advance.
What is the greatest evil you can think of and who do you think is to blame for it?
Who is the greatest sinner, Satan or God?
I lean toward God as scriptures name him the Alpha and Omega which to me means the best and the worse. Also, scriptures have God saying not to place any other above him and I would be going against this by placing Satan above him in the category of the most evil. I do not want to break the first commandment.
Do you dare by putting Satan above God?
Regards
DL