How many GODS do you have?

[Absolute_Agent]

OK, for argument's sake, I'll accept that there is a god, and he foresaw that many of his creation would reject his existence.

Then why did he even create those of us that find us in that position? I am not sure if you believe in eternal punishment, or annihilation theory, but either way, your god is still creating billions of people, knowing ahead of time that they are destined for punishment (or not being rewarded), all because he fails to provide us with evidence.

If there is a god, and he wants to punish me for not being gullible enough to believe he exists, I guess there's nothing I can do about it. But how does that not make him a moral thug?

Because the primary criteria for judgement is not intellectual positions or beliefs, but conduct.  All valid religions teach that doing good to others is a measure of faith, that God will judge our ACTIONS.  You may go your whole life rejecting the intellectual notion of God, but if you spend your time taking care of your family, being courteous, magnanimous & generous, forgiving,  encouraging the despairing and standing up for the poor... You are fulfilling the requirements of God, and will be rewarded richly.  No good deed goes unrewarded, even so little as avoiding stepping on an ant on the sidewalk.  A religious person could spend their life praying night and day, but it they were really mean to others they might end up in hell just the same.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[Simon Moon]

Because the primary criteria for judgement is not intellectual positions or beliefs, but conduct.  All valid religions teach that doing good to others is a measure of faith, that God will judge our ACTIONS.  You may go your whole life rejecting the intellectual notion of God, but if you spend your time taking care of your family, being courteous, magnanimous & generous, forgiving,  encouraging the despairing and standing up for the poor... You are fulfilling the requirements of God, and will be rewarded richly.  No good deed goes unrewarded, even so little as avoiding stepping on an ant on the sidewalk.  A religious person could spend their life praying night and day, but it they were really mean to others they might end up in hell just the same.

2 billion Christians would disagree with you. And so does the Bible.

The New Testament specifically states that, accepting Jesus as your savior, and repenting your sins, are the way to get into heaven.

“No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). “There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

Not only that, but the NT also says several times, that no one is good or does good works.

"Everyone has turned away, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one." (Psalm 53:3, NIV)

"All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away." (Isaiah 64:6, NIV)

“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is goodâ€"except God alone." (Luke 18:19, NIV)

I see you use the phrase, "All valid religions", which sounds a lot like a "no true Scotsman" fallacy. In other words, it sounds like you are saying, that those Christians that believe the above passages, do no belong to a "valid religion".

Funny thing is, if I ask those Bible believing Christians that do follow the above passages, they will tell me that you, with your works/actions based criteria for being judged, is not a "valid religion".

How am I, a non believer in all religions and gods, supposed to tell which one of you is correct? If any of you? 

[Cavebear]

At the moment the context is that we are discussing God as omniscient (hypothetical of course for Mr. Moon).  And His question pertains to the logicality of the concept of God--not proof of existence.  I personally don't view attempting to prove God's existence as a valid exercise to engage in.  I'm focused on exploring it's logicality.

In my faith, I accept God as all knowing based on scriptural information.  If He is all knowing it logically follows he foresaw each and every person who would reject Him.  But I don't know who they are, except when, as in Mr. Moon's case, they state as much. Have I received personal evidence God is all-knowing? Yes, much.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

OK.  I didn't want to get into a discussion of the weeds in the religious beliefs, but since you and Simon (whom I agree with fully on this matter) are I will join.

In a logical sense, it would require a being without ethics or concern to create lesser beings possessed of logical reasoning and then punish them for being wrong in spite of their best efforts to understand the world they are born into.  Granted, all religious texts may be wrong in spite of the best efforts of inspired writers dedicated to honoring the deity, so a deity may be quite beyond our comprehension.  As may all atheist thoughts about science.

So, doesn't that mean that all humans are doomed to wherever bad humans go after mortal life?

But let's say that an all-good deity ignores that, understanding that all we humans are failing to understand It.  Does It punish us for that?  No. 

Yet, if It forgives, what of our question about whether it exists or not.  Does It single out non-believers for failure?  What does It do presented with non-belief?

[Unbeliever]

In my faith, I accept God as all knowing based on scriptural information.

Which set of scriptures are you steeped in?

[Unbeliever]

You know a dictionary definition.  Without having the theology of Paul, you can't understand what he was saying.  And Paul may be wrong.

Of course he was wrong, if he even existed and wrote those letters. He had no idea what he was talking about, except that he knew what he imagined.

Here's the reference, for those not familiar with it:

11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

I see reason as a lighthouse, and faith is the rocks below.

[Baruch]

Of course he was wrong, if he even existed and wrote those letters. He had no idea what he was talking about, except that he knew what he imagined.

Here's the reference, for those not familiar with it:


I see reason as a lighthouse, and faith is the rocks below.

Paul was a Romantic, not a Rationalist.  Those existed, they were called neo-Pythagoreans.  Paul in terms of that time, was a Jewish Cynic.  I don't consider any of those positions to be ignorant, even if they aren't yours or mine.  People here are neo-Pythagoreans for the most part.  The cat fight of philosophy continues after 2000 years.

[Cavebear]

Paul was a Romantic, not a Rationalist.  Those existed, they were called neo-Pythagoreans.  Paul in terms of that time, was a Jewish Cynic.  I don't consider any of those positions to be ignorant, even if they aren't yours or mine.  People here are neo-Pythagoreans for the most part.  The cat fight of philosophy continues after 2000 years.

Pythagoras was skilled but also a mystic.  The neopythagoreans were worse.  May all their triangles be on a sphere to boggle them forever...

[Baruch]

Pythagoras was skilled but also a mystic.  The neopythagoreans were worse.  May all their triangles be on a sphere to boggle them forever...

Yes, and you are one of the most bigoted people I know (strong minded in other words).  I can't see you completing a "paint by numbers" let alone a free painting.

But I wasn't speaking of his mysticism.  But do you always turn to ad hominem?

[Absolute_Agent]

2 billion Christians would disagree with you. And so does the Bible.

Quite... So you're a Christian atheist?

How am I, a non believer in all religions and gods, supposed to tell which one of you is correct? If any of you?

I should think it quite impossible.  This is why I didn't come to you atheists until carefully studying religion to such a level that I am capable of distinguishing the correct and logical understanding of what God intended to convey in them.  I have been working on this my whole life.


Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[Baruch]

Quite... So you're a Christian atheist?
I should think it quite impossible.  This is why I didn't come to you atheists until carefully studying religion to such a level that I am capable of distinguishing the correct and logical understanding of what God intended to convey in them.  I have been working on this my whole life.


Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Atheists give one lessons in arrogance.

People can't avoid the "traces" of their previous belief systems.  Only Cavebear is a pure atheist here.  He had no religion at all, and still doesn't.  He is virgin.

[Absolute_Agent]

Which set of scriptures are you steeped in?

I read all scriptures, but mostly the Qur'an.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[Cavebear]

Yes, and you are one of the most bigoted people I know (strong minded in other words).  I can't see you completing a "paint by numbers" let alone a free painting.

But I wasn't speaking of his mysticism.  But do you always turn to ad hominem?

I spoke no ad hominem in that post.  You are correct about the paint-by AND freeform.  I couldn't draw a deer to save my life.  Seriously, the time I tried, family thought it was a dog.

But what this about an ad hominem?

[Mike Cl]

.....conduct.  All valid religions teach that doing good to others is a measure of faith, that God will judge our ACTIONS.  You may go your whole life rejecting the intellectual notion of God, but if you spend your time taking care of your family, being courteous, magnanimous & generous, forgiving,  encouraging the despairing and standing up for the poor... You are fulfilling the requirements of God, and will be rewarded richly.  No good deed goes unrewarded, even so little as avoiding stepping on an ant on the sidewalk. 
Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

I do go along with the above and try to live my life in that manner.  But I would remove the words: "You are fulfilling the requirements of God", because for me I don't see any evidence for any god.  And if all could live like that, we would have world peace in my time. 

[Cavebear]

I wonder if Absolute Agent even understands that atheists behave ethically.  I've seen that error before.  They usually claim that being religious is a necessary pre-condition for being "good.

What amazes me is that most of the ethic demands in the bible are plain ordinary sense of what a society needs to work.  As far as I can tell, all religious texts FOLLOW general social understanding rather than lead it.  If you are part of a emerging city, OF COURSE you should not steal.  You need a book or preacher to tell you that?  OF COURSE you should not covet (neighbors wife, cattle, goods, etc).  THat just causes problems and was obvious to any society 40,000 years ago. 

The books were written to codify what people already knew.  Get over it theists...

[Mike Cl]

I wonder if Absolute Agent even understands that atheists behave ethically.  I've seen that error before.  They usually claim that being religious is a necessary pre-condition for being "good.

What amazes me is that most of the ethic demands in the bible are plain ordinary sense of what a society needs to work.  As far as I can tell, all religious texts FOLLOW general social understanding rather than lead it.  If you are part of a emerging city, OF COURSE you should not steal.  You need a book or preacher to tell you that?  OF COURSE you should not covet (neighbors wife, cattle, goods, etc).  THat just causes problems and was obvious to any society 40,000 years ago. 

The books were written to codify what people already knew.  Get over it theists...

I agree with that.  and most seem to think that we are lacking in experience or have never considered in a very serious way,  what being religious is about.  They almost seem to be saying we are too empty headed to have struggled with the concept of god and what that means.  Or that we have never been  a member or any religion.  They seem to assume all they will need to do is to spread their particular 'word' and we will simply swoon and utter, 'thank you'.