Because your religion is wrong.
You are hereQuotes / defaithed's Quotes / Then why call him God?
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
Of course, even the general designation 'religious' includes various basic ideas or convictions, for example, the indestructibility of the soul, the eternity of its existence, the existence of a higher being, etc. But all these ideas, regardless of how convincing they may be for the individual, are submitted to the critical examination of this individual and hence to a fluctuating affirmation or negation until emotional divination or knowledge assumes the binding force of apodictic faith. This, above all, is the fighting factor which makes a breach and opens the way for the recognition of basic religious views.
Mein Kampf, Vol. 2 Chapter 1
If you are on some sort of medication and are not taking your pills for some reason....thinking...
Thanks for the tip. I've nixed some false quotations in the past, and am happy to remove any...
Ben Franklin never said that...another of the many fake quotes circulating on the internet....
Thank you for the comments. Yes, the passivity and respect you mention are part of the special...
Indeed. It cracks me up when an Abrahamic fundamentalist calls atheists amoral, nihilistic, and...
If I may toot my own shofar, a few of the posts I like best:
God is not great. Think about the fact that since god is all-knowing and created the universe, he had an infinite amount of options to chose from. He chose the one were we all suffer. Think about the fact that since he is all knowing and created the universe, he is responsible for everything anyone has ever done. And yet he punishes us. For something he made us do.
I guess that means God did 9/11
this is crazy. have you no faith? your terrible. I hope god has mercy on your soul.
Why is this terrible? If you believe god is omnipotent, then you MUST conclude god controls everything that has and ever will happen.
Why would god need a starship?
To paraphrase the iPhone ads: "There's an apologetic for that."
I don't know the list of specific apologetics to "rebut" your point, but I'm sure there's something in there about it all being our fault anyway, because, uh... free will, and a Devil, and Eve was bad, and then there's some other stuff. Whatever the details, the outcome is a given: God gets cleared of charges and remains Mr Love and Mercy.
Nonsense. You've got it right. Christopher Hitchens frames the issue most eloquently (though my clumsy paraphrasing won't do him any favors): "God creates us sick, and then, on pain of death or torment, commands us to get well."
Do you call your father GOD? ,yet he created your body, if it wasn't for earth, you wouldn't exist, yet people pray to God. If someone gave you food would you thank him, or would you thank god. If god is a good father, he would let you be, he would ask for no reward, yet he would communicate with you, because there is no way to separate from him. Is this a God over you, or is he just a part of you. Isn't God an outdated term? Whether there is one or not, many people believed that God was violent and needed to punish the heathens, and thence went and killed everyone, but we are the ones with the power. We are the ones that can choose to act or not, it is not just because of God, nor do I owe God anything. Nor do I need his power to create what I wish in life, because I am a spark of life too, and I have the power to believe in anything that I wish for myself and others. If god is my father, why do I have to go and kiss his ass all the time? He would be much more satisfied if I learned to express myself and be a good man on my own. Isn't that what fathers want, for their child to be INDEPENDENT?
And the other big oddity about this Father: A real father is tangible and demonstrable. The theist father is intangible and undemonstrated as Santa Claus.
In order for love to be gratifying and true one must love freely. Creating beings with free will to love God, was to risk that there would be those that choose to reject him. Imagine a parent offeringa child a cookie and the child says I love you. The love feels empty, interferred with. They want the reward. But what reward comes to you, when the child freely and unprovoked rushes up and embraces their parent, to tell them how much they are loved cookie or no cookie. Which would be more gratifying as a parent. In much the same way, God the Father wants us to choose to love him. In order to create the opportunity for choice, he had to allow for us the possibility we would choose wrong. Then again, is it not selfish of God to need to be loved, at the expense of the human experience? Why are we created to serve as an answer to his cosmic social experiment?
God IS offering his creation a cookie. How many religious people would still claim to love their God(s), if not for the fear of punishment or hope of reward?
I pass two Baptist churches on my way to school each day. These churches routinely change the arrangeable signs on their grounds. They rarely stress religion as a foundation for philosophy or instructive principles. Instead, they focus on religion as a means by which to escape damnation and receive paradise. If a parent tells their child to love them, and threatens to submit them to the most heinous torture if they refuse, so the child obeys the parent out of feaf, is the love gratifying? Is it empty and interferred with?
"In order to create the oppurtunity for choice, he had to allow for us the possibility we would choose wrong."You assume here that it is only right to choose to love God. Your Christian God.Are you saying, then, that all Buddhists, Confucianists, Hindus, and every other believer in a God other than your own is inherentely wrong?If God is conducting a cosmic social experiment, then there must be other omnipresent beings with whom to share the experiment, right? If there is experimenting to me done, then God doesn't know everything about the universe. Even if He (She?) is conducting an experiment, experiments are based off of the scientific method. God adheres, then, to the human created scientific method?Also, how do you know what God wants? Isn't the whole idea that He (She?) is greater than you?
He? She? Or maybe It? Or They?
I know They hasn't been in favor for some millennia (well, at least in the mono-god parts of the world), but let's not forget the possibility of Gods! Big, holy bunches of Them!
The Bible says God can do anything (omnipotence). The Bible also says God is good.However, the Bible also talks about people suffering in Hell for eternity. Christians have told us that the choice to turn from the road to heaven must be available so that people can have free will. Why doesn't God make it so everyone has free will AND everyone chooses, of their own free will, the path which will lead them to heaven? If he can’t do this, then he’s not omnipotent. If he can and doesn’t, then he must want some people to suffer in hell for eternity, meaning he’s evil.
Indeed. Christianity (and Islam) claim that their god has properties of omnipotence and love and this, that, and the other, but then go on to describe a god that's entirely different (in very bad ways).
The curtains don't match the drapes. (Or something like that.)
your god sounds incredibly insecure for an all knowing, all powerful overlord
Indeed. Keeping in mind that claims of gods and what not are never proven to be false, we have to always admit the possibility that the Abrahamic God does indeed exist – and that he's every bit as insecure, incompetent, and evil as his followers paint him to be.
It's a scary thought; I'm sure glad it seems so unlikely!
So, he has put together a system where people can apparently choose against his wishes and face damnation as a result, given a choice, and no solid evidence on what to really believe, so we're born here lost and confused... So that he can feel like he's genuinely loved? sounds a bit bipolar to me. and why if he's the alpha omega, does he care about our love anyway? If he wanted us to love him genuinely without incentive, he could have designed human beings that way, he didn't, ergo, he doesn't exist. It's like me inventing a toaster to cook a turkey. Also, Christian kids don't get to play with dinosaurs D:<
Hey, I was a JW kid, and I got to play with dinosaurs! I had dinos galore. Heck, more and more Christian kids are now getting the chance to ride dinos, just like Adam and Eve did! (Well, I don't know about Eve. As Adam's inferior, subservient half, she may not have been allowed.)
But I recall that my kiddie questions about where dinosaurs fit into Bible history/genealogy were met with a foggy sort of "don't think about it too hard" and a changing of the topic. (Hmm, it'd be interesting to do a survey of what various religions and sects come up with as explanations for dinosaur fossils and the place of dinos in creation stories. Should be an entertaining hotchpotch of utterly contradictory claims!)
Your last couple of sentences provide the main answer to the preceding parts. You're right: How is it good and just that people are puppets at the mercy of some cosmic nutcase who craves fearful worship?
But there are many other ways to address the "God loves us and so He lets us all choose good or bad" nonsense. For starters, I might point out to anyone making such claims that human experience and scripture alike make clear that God doesn't let all of us make such choices.
What about the stillborn, the short-lived, those born with mental defects and unable to comprehend such high-flying discussions of morality? How is God letting them make life's choices? Where's their chance to "love freely"?
How about the game God and Satan played with Job? Yes, he was being offered choice in the way addressed by apologetics, but how about his family and slaves, whom God allowed to be murdered as part of the game? Where was their "choice" in all this? They were disposable toys to God.
Sick stuff. Fortunately, there's not a single reason to think any of it's true!
Thanks for the thoughts!
Christians believe that god exists, yet chooses not (rarely) interfere. He leaves us to our own devices and allows us free will. For our choices we will be judged.I'm not a christian but that answers the question. He's not malevolent. He just chooses not to interfere because death isn't really the end and he sees the bigger picture.
Millions of Christians would disagree with you: the ones who fervently believe that God actively intervenes in lives... that he "answers" prayers... that he works "miracles" for survivors of accidents while "taking" the victims... even that he smites people with hurricanes and earthquakes because somebody was acting all gay or otherwise "immoral".
You'll have to work out the clash between your claim vs the claims of those millions of Christians who say you're wrong. That sounds like an incredibly difficult job, and I sympathize – honest, no sarcasm! – with you on the hugeness of that challenge. For every religious claim you make, there are millions of believers who say you're wrong or lying, or using the wrong scripture or wrong interpretation, or believing in the wrong god, and/or are blaspheming and heading for divine punishment. What methods does religion offer for you all to determine which of you is right? I have no idea, and am genuinely curious as to what means you'll use to resolve your disagreement with each other.
In any case, even if Christians can't agree on whether or not God interferes today, they should have no disagreement regarding the past. The Bible offers a stunning record of God destroying armies, slaying firstborn babies, sending animals to butcher children, and even drowning nearly every man, woman, child, baby, and fetus on Earth in one incident of divine mass-slaughter. That's interference on a global scale, with God allowing utterly no choice or free will for the children, babies, and fetuses he murdered.
It would seem even the Bible doesn't agree with your claim about non-interference and allowing free will to make choices. I'm curious: On what basis do you make the claim that the Bible is wrong and you're right on this point?
You are wondering by what means will be used to resolve this disagreement? Try reading the book of revelation.
Try reading the book of Revelations, you say? Which translation, and through the lens of what interpretation? Or shouldn't I be getting my answer from the Koran instead? The Torah? Buddhist sutras? Hindu texts? L Ron Hubbard?
How to resolve this disagreement? The question stands.
haha i actually thought they might mke an honest attempt a answering. instead you just get biblical threats. how stereotypical.
And what's more, it's some nonsense about "God will set a judge". Big deal; humans have been appointing judges for millennia. God is slow!
31For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed.Acts17:31
Well that certainly didn't answer Epicurus' quiz. Then again, to be honest, he did ask a whole bunch of questions at once, which isn't good interviewer technique.
So, if you're interested in answering, we could reduce Epicurus' words into a single, simple question:
Assuming some God creature exists, is he/she/it: (a) willing to prevent evil, but not able; (b) able to prevent evil, but not willing; or (c) both able and willing to prevent evil?
Or if a (d) choice is needed, speak up – though I think (a) to (c) really cover the possibilities. What do you say?
Acts 17:31When they all call him God31For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed.
Post new comment