Is that you, Brian McGee?

[youtube]BA7p5VwAXk0[/youtube]

I enjoy it too. Especially when people can keep a cool head, which is rare.
Was raised in an evangelical family, so I know all the shiz and even did theological courses and study in my teens. But then I turned 17 and discovered beer and boobies.

I suppose in terms of justice, The idea is that God leaves the crimes against men to the justice of men and the crimes against God to his own justice.

What freedom is there in an interventionalist God?

A moment of silence for the rekt.

We have biological limitations (death, injury, etc) but as a species we can achieve anything, unfortunately most incredible things take longer than a lifetime to evolve into fruition.

God may well serve justice 'post-death' but that's unknown to us. We can't comprehend what happens after death, so why can't justice be served in the temporal world where we can see criminals being punished divinely, thus bringing closure to the victims/families and stopping all this debate? It all seems conveniently mysterious.

Forgive me if I'm harping on, in the middle of essays on the same subjects and I know very few people who openly talk about this kind of stuff (why I don't know, they're great convos IMO)

Very true. But humanity has limitations, that's undeniable surely?

I've already said he biblical justice is in death and post death. The other point is that all sin is seen as equal is the sight of the Christian God, and I for one am glad that he doesn't smite me where I stand every time I lie, get drunk or have pre-marital sex.

Who says God is unlimited and who says humans are limited? Humanity has invented profound things such as medicine, technology, literature, etc without the aid of a deity. We can attempt to study the very beginnings of the universe and travel to space ffs.

If he is so unlimited and therefore wise/perfect why can't he stop small things (relative to his omniscience) such as child rape, religious wars and child trafficking? Or does he do it in secret like Batman?

For some reason The Daily Telegraph absolutely love burying stories that slate the church.

In Thursday's edition, I could only find a brief column delivering this story without headline or pictures on page 5 (that then linked to an Andrew Bolt story on page 13) wedged onto a virtually full page ad that featured 3x Jenny Hawkins in a swimsuit.

Would they be this enthusiastic over Islamic child grooming ?



edit: Oh and for the record, this Pell story was the abc.net.au/news top story on Wednesday, can you guess what was literally the top story on Thursday?

Spoiler alert: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-22/police-dismiss-claims-canberra-teen-targeted-by-is-recruiters/6488992

Edited by absent_doz_2259: 23/5/2015 01:04:29 PM

Well that's really one of the key points isn't it? Fallen humans are called to be like him. I do see what you're saying, but it's grinds with me for some reason. I'm sure a little more context would fix the issue.

:lol: it just doesn't make sense for an incredibly limited human to try and place parameters on an unlimited God. Yes, from a human perspective, the Christian God is a cunt, but that's not evidence That he doesn't exist.
That arguement is worse than Christians saying that life proves there is a creator.

Of course Nietzsche didn't think he was actually the only Christian (there's clearly millions of them), the meaning behind the quotation is to imply that he was the only one who acted like a real Christian as that was an argument in his book The Antichrist, amongst others. (I don't agree with that particular argument at all, MLK comes to mind)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Antichrist_(book)

I don't see how calling Christ a Christian is nonsensical. If anything he is the archetypal Christian, which we as fallen humans can strive to be like.

Plz tell me more on the NT's views

Edited by marconi101: 23/5/2015 12:21:09 PM

Of course he knew it, but saying that he was the only Christian is just so, so stupid. He was supposedly the perfect Jew... It makes no sense at all to call him a Christian.

Well, in your opinion.... However, the NT is pretty clear about God's justice being done through death....

Can't believe people still believe in god. smh. How embarrassing.

the question is rhetorical

For some reason the abc absolutely love stories that slate the church

Would they be this enthusiastic over Islamic child grooming ?

no

you're mistaking god for the government

the government think they can enact laws and that will change the will of man

it may change their behavior but wont change the will

Lol@Fedora lord. If he knew dipshits like notorganic were actually going to be believing they understood what old Freddy was actually talking about, I'm sure he would have offed himself rather than merely talk about doing it. Don't blame the author because of the messengers.

Which makes this god a kunt then. Nothing stopping this all seeing, all powerful, omnipotent and supposedly "Loving" sky daddy from clicking his heels and making people less shit to each other.

no he wouldnt

man has to learn these lessons himself

And you think Nietzsche didn't know that?

If God really existed or gave a shit he would stop men living in his name from raping people

LooooooooL
What a shocking quote.... Jesus was Jewish...

It's not really evidence of any of those three actually.

Why was my comment deleted? It was God wasn't it?

As a fellow Atheist we can agree that if we believe that then we have to believe in talking snakes and all the joys of the Old Testament, to which I can say with almost certainty is crap.

.



Edited by MUNRUBENMUZ: 21/5/2015 11:35:23 PM

They're not my arguments.

I'm not saying their reasoning is logically consistent I'm just saying this is what they trot out to explain away inconsistencies.

BTW. Does omniscient by definition stretch to knowing the future?

Doesn't it just mean all-knowing? I can't remember reading anywhere where it said God knows what the future will be in each and every case.

Unless you know a human who has omniscient knowledge of the future the above is irrelevant as a comparison.

Since God is omniscient and omnipotent, he's responsible for the evil acts of his creation: he knew they would occur, but failed to prevent them.

If God is responsible for the evil we choose to do, then we in turn are responsible for the evil our adult children choose to do. We know in advance that everyone does some amount of evil - at the very least, lying, insulting people or hurting their feelings, etc. - and that includes our children. We could choose to not bring this additional evil into the world by, say, getting ourselves sterilized. Thus we're in the same boat as God: we know evil will occur by our bringing children into the world, and we are able to prevent this, but we don't. Yet we don't hold the parents of adults responsible for what their children choose to do. (See also Gregory Koukl's statement of this argument.)

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/evil.html

A god who is omnipotent would know the entire result of his creation before he makes it. Knowing the result of his decision to give free will does not explain away that problem.

Umm no. If you're going to blame anyone, blame Eve.

Man has free will. All of the evil on earth is because of man's will not God's. http://www.openbible.info/topics/free_will



On his day of judgement he'll have to make his case. http://www.openbible.info/topics/judgment_day

Note: I'm an atheist and not after a theological debate. Just pointing out what their beliefs are.

Guilty until proven innocent? If Pell was a atheist or teacher there'd be nowhere near the same amount of vitriol being thrown at him. As far as I can tell this man is not in prison, not under investigation for any child sex crimes, and like everybody else is entitled to the presumption of innocence, so to call him the worst person in history is unjustified. Pell's main problem is he is Catholic, and that's what people are really raging about here.