The Futile Arguments Thread

[Event_Horizon]

The transgression is the ability to disobey God, that is what makes us unworthy.

So it's not the action itself but the ability to make such an action? By your assertion free will is then a sin even if someone chooses an entirely holy lifestyle. Then again God gave us free will, so God is then imposing sin ON us. How is that just if God is rigging the game against us and assuming we will lose? Christianity then assumes guilt, and only rewards people who give up that guilt. That is not justice. Justice is proving someone is guilty on the assumption that they are innocent, and condemning someone based on their specific actions. I mean, as much as the system of law in the U.S. could use some TLC (I can only speak for myself), it seems like a FAR better system than Biblical law, in which you are condemned because you have the ability to do something. Basically you're condemned for murder because you just happened to be born with hands.

Rape in the Bible:

http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/rape.html

When you explain slavery in a cultural context, a lot of what you say isn't entirely correct. Salves in the Old Testament specifically were prisoners of war. These slaves did not benefit from being captured, since their relatives were usually killed and their homes destroyed. Slaves were never at the stature of an apprentice. Sometimes they were indentured servants, but even so it is not ethical. Biblical law allowed masters to beat their slaves, and gave rules as to how long one could keep a slave, and loopholes to keep a slave forever. I consider that barbarism. The European enlightenment has done so much more for contemporary ethics than anything the Bible has produced.

There are moral dilemmas, but if there is an objective moral standard that man has proposed, why are men still evil by its own standards?

Yes there is an objective moral idea and we refer to it as human rights. That single principal shapes the vast majority of our ethical standards. That idea by far has benefited the world than anything the Bible has said.

So why can you give consent to a creator?  On what authority could you talk back to a creator God?

I cannot give consent to my creator because I do not exist to give consent. If the creator creates me for the sole purpose of their pleasure then they are treating me as a slave and putting me into slavery (existence) without my consent. Slavery by all ethical reason is wrong, and that's my point. If God creates us without our consent to use us as he pleases then it is not just. A just God would create someone, and then allow them to live their lives without devotion or slavery. Only an unjust God would create an individual being to which its sole purpose is devotion.

The issue of crime and evil, is of the heart.  You would owe the crime of disobedience to God.  You would justly owe the compensation, but the temporal nature of the theft is less in scope than the nature of the eternal disobedience.

You can never know what is in someone's heart or mind. You can only judge them by their actions. If Christianity says you are guilty based only on your existence and not your actions, then Christianity's ideas are not conducive to justice.

Where does the bible say that God commands us to obliterate our neighbor if they don't agree with us?

http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm

The simple fact they could not obey a simple rule of taking a Sabbath shows the infinite disobedience of their hearts.

The logic doesn't follow. It could be that the law was so silly or impractical that people had no reason to abide by it. There's no evidence to suggest that the law was even followed. However that is beside the point. The idea that you must kill someone because they work on a holy day is not just.

You can either accept the grace or not.

Easy: I don't accept. I don't need grace because I didn't do anything wrong when I was born. The wrong I do must be punished in this life with just punishment. Christianity is not just because as I said it assumes guilt, then coerces people to prove their innocence. It also punishes people who disagree with its premises. Christianity assumes that people are sick based entirely on an assumption that we are wicked people and need salvation. Humanity is not wicked. Humans are capable of wicked deeds, but the deeds alone are wicked, not the people.

They are on earthly terms, but not as God sees it, and what we're talking about is how God sees it.

The Bible was written by men. Especially by men who had prejudices, emotions, and ethical codes that are so far removed from real ethics. Our moral codes are so much more beneficial to the human condition than anything the Bible has said. If you'll pardon me, there is nothing that I see within the book to make me think it isn't something out of the bronze age. Any ethical improvements we've made to life on Earth have been independent of and sometimes contrary to the Bible. To say that this set of rules and the being who carries them out with infinite punishment is therefore just is definitely not so.

Creating someone and demanding servitude for their own creation is not just.

Assuming people are guilty instead of innocent is not just.

Convicting someone of a crime based only on their ability to perform the crime is not just.

Forcing salvation on someone then coercing them to repay is not just.

Infinite punishment is not just. (A finite crime done on an infinite being is still a finite crime because the action itself is finite.)

[Event_Horizon]

Event_Horizon, I love your posts. Good job debunking Christian "justice".

Thank you!  

[defendor]

I would like to address the question of the rules or rules in particular.  I have never addressed man's imposed rules, only God's.  Man is fallible and can impose unjust rules.  But God isn't.  What mandate has God given us that is unjust, or unfair?

As for the biblical evidence supposed, if the bible is essentially not true, why are you quoting it?  Why will you believe something in the bible or reference the bible as truth, when you won't believe or recognize anything else that the bible says about God or Jesus Christ as truth?

**This is regardless of the context and the misconstruing and understanding of the passages (most of which were purely historical accounts, not commissions from God, and also doesn't go into the parts where God judges Israel for heinous acts of disobedience)

I also think you are misunderstanding God's grace/justice.  If you finitely disobey an infinite God, your being defies the infinite.  SO your crime defies the weight of eternity.  Think of treason, if you do something such as join certain groups that defy your country's loyalty, in a country you have not even chose to be born in or live in, you will be tried unto death (life imprisonment) in most countries.  I hold the beliefs that we will all in some form or another exist for eternity.  If your being defies the infinite God, God leaves you to it, and will let you infinitely be in defiance of an infinite God (torment).

[LegendarySandwich]

I would like to address the question of the rules or rules in particular.  I have never addressed man's imposed rules, only God's.  Man is fallible and can impose unjust rules.  But God isn't.  What mandate has God given us that is unjust, or unfair?

What you have been arguing here is that God is just because he is just. I don't accept that.

As for the biblical evidence supposed, if the bible is essentially not true, why are you quoting it?  Why will you believe something in the bible or reference the bible as truth, when you won't believe or recognize anything else that the bible says about God or Jesus Christ as truth?

**This is regardless of the context and the misconstruing and understanding of the passages (most of which were purely historical accounts, not commissions from God, and also doesn't go into the parts where God judges Israel for heinous acts of disobedience)

Because that's how we can show the absurdities of Christianity?

I also think you are misunderstanding God's grace/justice.  If you finitely disobey an infinite God, your being defies the infinite.  SO your crime defies the weight of eternity.  Think of treason, if you do something such as join certain groups that defy your country's loyalty, in a country you have not even chose to be born in or live in, you will be tried unto death (life imprisonment) in most countries.  I hold the beliefs that we will all in some form or another exist for eternity.  If your being defies the infinite God, God leaves you to it, and will let you infinitely be in defiance of an infinite God (torment).

And I don't think that's fair or just.

[Whitney]

What mandate has God given us that is unjust, or unfair?

This has already been addressed.

As for the biblical evidence supposed, if the bible is essentially not true, why are you quoting it?  Why will you believe something in the bible or reference the bible as truth, when you won't believe or recognize anything else that the bible says about God or Jesus Christ as truth?

The discussion is about the Biblical god...so quoting the bible makes sense.  If we were discussing Sirens we'd quote from the Odyssey.  One does not have to consider a text to be true in order to reference it as part of a discussion...it's like being in a literature class.

If you finitely disobey an infinite God, your being defies the infinite.  

So?  That doesn't change that a finite action shouldn't be met with infinate punishment....it's really is neither here nor there if the being being offended is eternal or not.

Think of treason, if you do something such as join certain groups that defy your country's loyalty, in a country you have not even chose to be born in or live in, you will be tried unto death (life imprisonment) in most countries.

^Just because some countries do this doesn't mean it is just.

If your being defies the infinite God, God leaves you to it, and will let you infinitely be in defiance of an infinite God (torment).

Again, just because someone upsets an infinite being does not make it just for the being to impose infinite punishment....especially not infinite torment; does that not sound the least bit evil to you?  

Even if I knew this God were real I don't see why I'd want to worship such a vengeful being...damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Tank]

I would like to address the question of the rules or rules in particular.  I have never addressed man's imposed rules, only God's.  Man is fallible and can impose unjust rules.  But God isn't.  What mandate has God given us that is unjust, or unfair?

And this is where your world view and supporting arguments crumble like a house built on sand. As god(s) do not exist there are no rules made by them. All holy books are simply codified societal values endorsed by the erroneous belief in cultural superstitions. So we are discussing man's imposed rules. No god required.

As for the biblical evidence supposed, if the bible is essentially not true, why are you quoting it?  Why will you believe something in the bible or reference the bible as truth, when you won't believe or recognize anything else that the bible says about God or Jesus Christ as truth?

**This is regardless of the context and the misconstruing and understanding of the passages (most of which were purely historical accounts, not commissions from God, and also doesn't go into the parts where God judges Israel for heinous acts of disobedience)

People here quote the bible to reveal its human origins, i.e. the wishful thinking of people who want to receive praise and recognition from an idealised Sky Daddy.

I also think you are misunderstanding God's grace/justice.  If you finitely disobey an infinite God, your being defies the infinite.  SO your crime defies the weight of eternity.  Think of treason, if you do something such as join certain groups that defy your country's loyalty, in a country you have not even chose to be born in or live in, you will be tried unto death (life imprisonment) in most countries.  I hold the beliefs that we will all in some form or another exist for eternity.  If your being defies the infinite God, God leaves you to it, and will let you infinitely be in defiance of an infinite God (torment).

But defender as you are not a Muslim you will go to hell. Mohamed was the last prophet and Jesus was just and ego on a stick who thought he was the son of god. You are a damned soul in the eyes of the fastest and greatest religion on Earth. I mean how can Christianity compete with the level of devotion that creates the glorious martyrs of 9/11? Christianity is a 'has been' religion. Fractured, divided and dying of greed and corruption. Now I say this simply to illustrate to you that you have no right to special pleading for your particular institutionalised superstition.

[ForTheLoveOfAll]

Though I'm certain at least 10 other people have said this already, here I go, anyway.

The burden of proof is on YOUR shoulders, my friend. An Atheist takes the default stance that God DOES NOT exist since there is zero evidence that he does. You come in making the affirmative claim that he does exist, and we are simply saying that we don't think he does because there is nothing to support him existing. It's the same thing as saying a Leprachaun lives in your closet. If you come here telling us to prove that he doesn't, that wouldn't make much sense, would it? We can't. But at the same time YOU are the one making the claim that said Leprachaun actually exists, therefore WE don't need to prove or disprove anything.

However, we can call bullshit when we hear claims of an all power, all seeing, all loving, yet eager to inflict eternal torture on anyone cosmic granddaddy existing.

[McQ]

Though I'm certain at least 10 other people have said this already, here I go, anyway.

The burden of proof is on YOUR shoulders, my friend. An Atheist takes the default stance that God DOES NOT exist since there is zero evidence that he does. You come in making the affirmative claim that he does exist, and we are simply saying that we don't think he does because there is nothing to support him existing. It's the same thing as saying a Leprachaun lives in your closet. If you come here telling us to prove that he doesn't, that wouldn't make much sense, would it? We can't. But at the same time YOU are the one making the claim that said Leprachaun actually exists, therefore WE don't need to prove or disprove anything.

However, we can call bullshit when we hear claims of an all power, all seeing, all loving, yet eager to inflict eternal torture on anyone cosmic granddaddy existing.

Who are you addressing, by the way? Not clear without quotes.

[AnimatedDirt]

Christians believe Jesus died for their sins, so they have to accept him as their savior or go to hell.

Yes, Christians believe.  No, everyone does not "have to accept".  Most of Atheism says that if God exists, their choice would not be..to be...with this God.  Everyone has that choice.  If this God exists, then Hell (or better yet), non-existence is the result.

That means that because the Christian's ancestors did something bad, then God had to come down as Jesus and sacrifice himself to himself to remove that sin,

Bad?  Not necessarily "bad", but something against God.  One can make a "bad" choice in planting a tree in the summer, however it is not sinful to do so.  God did not "have to".  God did BECAUSE He is Love.

however humans have to pay tribute to the being which absolved them of their nonexistent sin or go to infinite torture.

Once again...what payment?  There is no payment.  NONE whatsoever.  You can pay tribute and still never be saved.  There's no payment.

God decreed humans have sin, Jesus got rid of it, and now humans owe Jesus. Jesus is blackmailing humanity.

God did not decree humans have sin.  Humans chose of their own freewill.  Unless one has the choice, then freewill doesn't exist and so true love does not exist either.  (true love for God)

It isn't twisted if you look objectively at it. There are fundamental ethical falsehoods that Christianity accepts as tenets of its religion.

Your total and complete misunderstanding and ignorance is the problem.  The fact is that you are not looking at it objectively or else you would see that freewill is not the cause of sin, PRIDE is the cause of sin.  Selfishness, the need to please self first.

1: The punishment for actions taken against one's ancestors also applies to you, even if you weren't involved, even if you were born centuries later (See God cursing humanity, not just Adam and Eve).

And likewise, the death of Christ is also my salvation and I need not die for my own sins.

For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.  --Romans 5:17

- Of course this is false because anything your parents do is independent of what you do. If your parents lie and cheat, it doesn't mean that you're also a liar and a cheater. Your ethical actions are your own, and only apply to you. If your actions are good, then regardless of what your parents or ancestors did, you are a good person.

I agree...humanly speaking.  However there is not one person that can say they are without a "bad" deed...a deed against God's will.

2: People are born deserving as punishment as a default (original sin).

Yes...ALL people.

- This is also false because to judge someone as "good" or "bad" is to judge them by their actions. A newborn takes no ethical or unethical actions, so it does not deserve punishment as a default. #1 also applies here as well.

It was conceived in sin, it was conceieved by two sinful creatures, from the moment of birth the baby is only concerned for self.  Not unethical or without reason either.

3: People are born owing their life to creator their, which they did not choose to accept in the first place. (See commanded devotion to God).

You aren't...are you?  Not at all.  You have the choice to choose not to owe anything.  You didn't accept life, but you claim to, as a citizen of some government, have some stake in it that the government owes you something?  Protection...why?  Just for being born?  What's the difference?

- Essentially this forces someone into slavery.

You are wrong.  Choice remains and so everyone has the choice to believe and act accordingly or not to believe.

This is wrong because people cannot choose to be born, because they do not exist before they are born. They don't choose their race, sex, nationality, or socioeconomic status. To say that a human owes a God for their existence, means you have forced that human into debt without their choice or consent.

Nope...you're wrong again.  Freewill choice remains.  Life is given.  What one does with their life is COMPLETELY up to each person.
No slavery, debt unless one chooses to feel so.

4: Unethical actions, such as murder and rape, are able to be washed clean by the punishment of an innocent bystander and not through the punishment of the perpetrator (See the sacrifice of Jesus).

Where do you find this as true.  We are all subject to the law of the land.  One may find forgiveness for ANYTHING...even by our own civil law.  Murderers can be sentenced to life in prison.  Their payment back to society is their life in prison.  Once they die, their debt is paid in full!  Likewise one can be sentenced to death for a crime(s).  Once the death is carried out, THEIR debt is paid to society.  Why do you find any difference in God's law?  I think what you find "wrong" is that God is able to punish like a father to his child and still love and nurture the child...no matter what the child does.

- Obviously nobody would accept hurting someone else for the unethical actions of another. If a person really likes someone else, that person can take the other's punishment for them, but not the other's responsibility. The one who committed the action is still responsible for it, regardless of how many others are punished or how harshly.

No argument here...hence why the Bible tells us we are to submit to government authority.

5: If someone does something to benefit another, even without that person's consent, they still owe the original person for the benevolent action (See commanded acceptance of Jesus).

Is what you're saying here that our "good" actions are only a credit to the "good" in us...as in Christ?  I disagree.  We are good in the human context, but none are good in the Godly context.  But if God exists, then Good is a result of God and then not of our own invention that we should be patted on the back.

- This is plainly false because it is akin to blackmail. Consider the situation if the mob forced a favor onto someone, then immediately asked for that person's servitude. I cannot do something nice for you without your consent, then force you to do something nice for me.

Where are you seeing God chopping off anyone's thumbs so that they'll do His will?  We all have choice and choose.

6: Infinite punishment is fair for a finite life (See Hell).

Again you show your ignorance.  The punishment is death.  It's not perpetual punishment as in being spanked endlessly or burned bit by bit for eternity.  It is everlasting in consequence, not in action.  The second death is final.  No returning.  Eternal separation from the Life Giver = Eternal Death or non-existence.

- Pretty self explanatory why it's wrong. An infinite punishment for one is excessive no matter the crime, since only an infinite crime can justify an infinite punishment, and mortals only exist in a finite lifetime. That, and an infinite punishment treats all unethical actions as the same. The person who steals 50$ is given the same punishment as a genocidal maniac who kills 13 billion people.

Yes.  It's death for both.  What is more merciful when dealing out punishment for crime?  Is it a quick death or a slow agonizing death?

And yet Christians say their God and his laws are just. Judging from the content of Christianity itself, this is not so.

If there is a God and He is omni~, then His law is infinite.  God is Just in allowing those that don't want eternal life to have death.  What is so wrong.  If God created you without your consent and gave you life, allowed you to live and gave you a choice to live forever with Him, but you chose not to, then you get to live your free life as you see fit and then cease to exist.

[AnimatedDirt]

But then again, I don't promote "proof" (as required by you) for faith and trust.

Then you can equally accept subatomic robots that created everything a few weeks ago including light in transit from distant stars. Given the lack of evidence for both concepts, they have equal rational weight.

Simply produce some books that speak of this subatomic robot(s) that were unearthed and found in the ruins of an ancient civilization, have been talked about since ancient times, at least some old books that speak of people dying for belief in this subatomic robot(s), and have millions of believers today who follow a book that encompasses these older books.  I may give it a thought.

Or you could simply point to the thread(s) on this Atheist forum where there is heated debate on whether this subatomic robot(s) exists and it is debated to the degree we debate this Abrahamic God.  Simply this would give me reason to give it serious thought.

Otherwise, Davin, you can keep your silly made-up god names, as your "proof" against mine, to yourself.  It really doesn't add to your argument.

Then it's a useless concept because it's indiscernible from it not existing.

You can find one at Borders, or Amazon dot com with ease.

Is your assumption that I haven't searched it out? After years of searching and finding nothing, I'll just wait for people to support their claims like I do with everything else (except the things I come up with, which I will provide support for).

By your ignorance on the facts therein?...YES!  Keep waiting.

[Stevil]

That means that because the Christian's ancestors did something bad, then God had to come down as Jesus and sacrifice himself to himself to remove that sin,

Bad?  Not necessarily "bad", but something against God.  One can make a "bad" choice in planting a tree in the summer, however it is not sinful to do so.  God did not "have to".  God did BECAUSE He is Love.

Love is an emotion, it could be equivalent to having a positive emotional attachment to something or someone, lust could also be a subset of the love emotion.
Love affects the being that is experiencing the emotion and may cause it to think or act accordingly but of itself it is not an action or a consciousness that can perform actions.
 
Love isn't a person, or animal, or life being or intelligent being.
Love does not perform actions.
Love does not have life and hence does not die and certainly does not sacrifice itself or its children to itself under any circumstances.

As an emotion Love is only conceptual and exists only within the mind of the person experiencing it. In this way God could be deemed as similar to love, however this emotion did not create our universe, does not have governance over our universe and does not offer an eternal afterlife. But then again if you ask the billions of non Christians they would agree that these statements are also correct with regards to the Christian god.

[ForTheLoveOfAll]

Though I'm certain at least 10 other people have said this already, here I go, anyway.

The burden of proof is on YOUR shoulders, my friend. An Atheist takes the default stance that God DOES NOT exist since there is zero evidence that he does. You come in making the affirmative claim that he does exist, and we are simply saying that we don't think he does because there is nothing to support him existing. It's the same thing as saying a Leprachaun lives in your closet. If you come here telling us to prove that he doesn't, that wouldn't make much sense, would it? We can't. But at the same time YOU are the one making the claim that said Leprachaun actually exists, therefore WE don't need to prove or disprove anything.

However, we can call bullshit when we hear claims of an all power, all seeing, all loving, yet eager to inflict eternal torture on anyone cosmic granddaddy existing.

Who are you addressing, by the way? Not clear without quotes.

To the author of the thread.

[Whitney]

To the author of the thread.

FYI for you and anyone else that might attempt to communicate with the OP...their login stats:

Joined:
    Tue 21 Dec, 2010 9:24 pm
Last visited:
    Wed 22 Dec, 2010 4:33 pm

I don't think we'll be hearing from ChristianWarrior again.

[ForTheLoveOfAll]

To the author of the thread.

FYI for you and anyone else that might attempt to communicate with the OP...their login stats:

Joined:
    Tue 21 Dec, 2010 9:24 pm
Last visited:
    Wed 22 Dec, 2010 4:33 pm

I don't think we'll be hearing from ChristianWarrior again.

Oh, jolly good then.

[AnimatedDirt]

That means that because the Christian's ancestors did something bad, then God had to come down as Jesus and sacrifice himself to himself to remove that sin,

Bad?  Not necessarily "bad", but something against God.  One can make a "bad" choice in planting a tree in the summer, however it is not sinful to do so.  God did not "have to".  God did BECAUSE He is Love.

Love is an emotion, it could be equivalent to having a positive emotional attachment to something or someone, lust could also be a subset of the love emotion.
Love affects the being that is experiencing the emotion and may cause it to think or act accordingly but of itself it is not an action or a consciousness that can perform actions.
 
Love isn't a person, or animal, or life being or intelligent being.
Love does not perform actions.
Love does not have life and hence does not die and certainly does not sacrifice itself or its children to itself under any circumstances.

As an emotion Love is only conceptual and exists only within the mind of the person experiencing it. In this way God could be deemed as similar to love, however this emotion did not create our universe, does not have governance over our universe and does not offer an eternal afterlife. But then again if you ask the billions of non Christians they would agree that these statements are also correct with regards to the Christian god.

Yes.  You are correct.  "God IS Love", is not to be taken literally.  Thanks for the clarification.

Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.