Originally posted by Suzianne
But do not most inventors, most creators, bring things about that are, of necessity, less impressive than themselves? Would not the Creator of the universe, as impressive as it is, have to be even more impressive?

My main point is that I can't accept invoking a complex thing (a god) in order to explain the origins of simpler things (matter and energy). It kicks the can down the road, since now the origins of the god must be explained; but the task becomes much worse because the god has a lot more components put together in a very specific way than matter and energy have.

My sense is that most don't believe in a god in order to explain the origins of the universe. They believe in a god by way of their very self-awareness making it seem plausible that we have souls that can exist apart from physical bodies. Even I think incorporeal life is a possibility.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I'll assume you meant 'pedant'. 🙂

I think the term applies just fine.

I reject the FSM because I do not believe in him/it. Yes, I reject him/it, and anything having to do with him/it. I have absolutely zero problem saying this. By not believing, I have rejected the possibility of it. Perfectly reasonable. And yet, I see atheist after athe ...[text shortened]... ady know Pascal's Wager doesn't work as a 'just in case' mechanism. So what is the real reason?

In just the same way that "Do you still beat your wife?" is a loaded questionReveal Hidden Contentso is the question "Do you reject God" (since it implies I am consciously involved in some sort of mutiny against this entity).

If you were to phrase it as "Do you reject the possibility that God exists?" then that would be quite easy for me - YES.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Did Abraham actually kill his son? No. It was a test. And Abraham, by faith, passed.

no but abraham didnt know it was only a test and was put in a position where he had decided he was going to have to stab his own child to death. maybe im confusing sin with morality, but you have to admit it was a pretty sick thing for god to do.

Originally posted by Suzianne
But our position is that it's reality, so why shouldn't it "be the norm"?

It IS the "norm" for us.

Yes, I get it. It ISN'T the "norm" for you.

Still, either way you look at it, the end result is a rejection of God. Why not call it what it is?

do you feel you have rejected allah?

Originally posted by Agerg
In just the same way that "Do you still beat your wife?" is a loaded question[hidden]either a yes or no answer imply a point where one did beat his wife[/hidden]so is the question "Do you reject God" (since it implies I am consciously involved in some sort of mutiny against this entity).

If you were to phrase it as "Do you reject the possibility that God exists?" then that would be quite easy for me - YES.

Only those who bring their own baggage to the question think it's a loaded question. And it's a question. It wants an answer, I don't see how a question implies anything. This is why another poster had a topic entitled "Why do you reject God?", this is closer to the obvious. It treats the idea that atheists reject God as a given, which is how I see it. The only question left is why, but I'm guessing 90+% of the time, the answer is simply "Because I do not believe in it." We don't need to make the thing more complicated than that, really.

Originally posted by Soothfast
My main point is that I can't accept invoking a complex thing (a god) in order to explain the origins of simpler things (matter and energy). It kicks the can down the road, since now the origins of the god must be explained; but the task becomes much worse because the god has a lot more components put together in a very specific way than matter and energy ...[text shortened]... ouls that can exist apart from physical bodies. Even I think incorporeal life is a possibility.

But without God, wouldn't a soul be rather useless? Or are you saying some people believe in God merely to provide support for the idea that a soul exists? Hmmm, I haven't thought of that, I suppose it could be possible.

And yes, physics, as a whole, is rather simple, yet elegant. All the more reason to suspect it was brought into being by God.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
no but abraham didnt know it was only a test and was put in a position where he had decided he was going to have to stab his own child to death. maybe im confusing sin with morality, but you have to admit it was a pretty sick thing for god to do.

Morality is a human construct. Sin is disobeying God.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
do you feel you have rejected allah?

Allah is nothing more than the Arabic for 'God'.*

There is no 'special' Islamic God; Judaism, Christianity and Islam all worship the same entity, the God of Abraham... the only differences arise in the way they worship Him. And no, I would not reject God, to do so is a sin (for all three groups, btw).



* And yes, I am aware that many other languages use this same word for 'God'.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Allah is nothing more than the Arabic for 'God'.*

There is no 'special' Islamic God; Judaism, Christianity and Islam all worship the same entity, the God of Abraham... the only differences arise in the way they worship Him. And no, I would not reject God, to do so is a sin (for all three groups, btw).



* And yes, I am aware that many other languages use this same word for 'God'.

okay smarty pants......

do you feel you have reject vishnu?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Morality is a human construct. Sin is disobeying God.

i guess its impossible for god to sin then. nice little system he has there. do as i say not what i do.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Morality is a human construct. Sin is disobeying God.

Suzianne you appear to have missed my question -

God explicitly told the Hebrews to kill children. How is that not sinful?

'Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’

1 Samuel 15:3

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i guess its impossible for god to sin then. nice little system he has there. do as i say not what i do.

NO. The fact is that it is impossible for God to sin as God cannot abide sin. This is why, compared to OT times, He has very little contact with the human race, almost no one is deserving.

More like Do as I say AND as I do.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Suzianne you appear to have missed my question -

God explicitly told the Hebrews to kill children. How is that not sinful?

'Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, [b]children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’

1 Samuel 15:3[/b]

God charged Saul and the Hebrews to go to war with the Amalekites. Exactly as he charged Joshua and the Hebrews to go to war with the Canaanites. None should survive, lest their wicked gods should infect the Hebrews. Both men failed to do so, and as a result, the Hebrews were led into the Babylonian Exile as punishment. 60 years of torment for an entire people instead of following God's command.

God had reasons for commanding such. And as usual, men thought they knew better.

Originally posted by Suzianne
NO. The fact is that it is impossible for God to sin as God cannot abide sin. This is why, compared to OT times, He has very little contact with the human race, almost no one is deserving.

More like Do as I say AND as I do.

It's impossible for god to sin because sin is going against the command of god.
Thus whatever god does or what god commands is not a sin by definition.

Which is why I only care whether something is moral and I don't give a [expletive]
whether something is a sin or not.


Sin is an evil and stupid idea.

Stick with morality.

Originally posted by Suzianne
God charged Saul and the Hebrews to go to war with the Amalekites. Exactly as he charged Joshua and the Hebrews to go to war with the Canaanites. [b]None should survive, lest their wicked gods should infect the Hebrews. Both men failed to do so, and as a result, the Hebrews were led into the Babylonian Exile as punishment. 60 years of torment for an ...[text shortened]... 's command.

God had reasons for commanding such. And as usual, men thought they knew better.[/b]

Reasons? Tell me about these reasons for commanding the killing of children.