If there were a just God

[(Q)]

what would the world be like if gods presence were here and preventing all the disasters and child molesters and anything else that was painfull...

i dont think we have to look far to answer that question..just look at all the spoiled rotten rich kids..our society would be in pretty sad shape..

Rather silly in the extreme. What does children not being raped by molesters and tsunamis not killing a quarter million people have to do with spoiled rotten rich kids? That makes no sense whatsoever. You're actually promoting molesters and natural disasters as a good thing. Is that your idea of a good society?

of course that is still assuming we will still get to make our own choices..
god created us to make our own choices..hence the apple in the garden..to see if he succeeded in giving us free will..

Clearly, your god isn't omniscient if he didn't know that was going to happen. It would appear your god is faulty as he failed in his little experiment, don't ya think?

as far as judgement day...what do you think would happen after he said 'go forth and multiply'?

The planet is overrun with theists who are destroying it and everyone else with their scriptures held high in front of them.

 

[(Q)]

And so I presented an argument where both God and Him being Just are not contradicting the world we see and thus nullifying his argument against God.

You did no such thing. Your argument was fallacious. You presented it under the guidelines of "human standards" which is not the case at all. Societies have been dominated by cults for centuries, hence our standards are based on scriptures.

What is your definition of "human standards?"

 

[Grim_Reaper]

yes, that's a good point. like birds know to fly south for the winter, and they flock. i think we'll be connected like flocks and herds and hives...won't that be great?!?!

Oh great so now God is the Borg I knew it damn it I knew it..

 

[jayleew]

Rather silly in the extreme. What does children not being raped by molesters and tsunamis not killing a quarter million people have to do with spoiled rotten rich kids? That makes no sense whatsoever. You're actually promoting molesters and natural disasters as a good thing. Is that your idea of a good society?

lol! Take two seconds to breath, then reread his statement. That's not what he's saying.

The planet is overrun with theists who are destroying it and everyone else with their scriptures held high in front of them.

Theists are destroying the planet? I suppose they have the potential to since chances are WW3 might be rooted in religious and cultural differences.

But seriously, you seem to me to be just as dangerous as theists based on your strong fallicious statements.

If we want to save the world, we are going to have to come together and respect the fact that there is no proof of god, and there is no proof of the lack of a god. So, everyone is entitled to their opinion within the bounds on civilized behavior and mutual respect. It is those on the far side of each position that are dangerous to the world.

 

[Lori_7]

Sin is what destroys and atheists and theists are equally afflicted.

 

[786]

You did no such thing. Your argument was fallacious. You presented it under the guidelines of "human standards" which is not the case at all. Societies have been dominated by cults for centuries, hence our standards are based on scriptures.

What is your definition of "human standards?"

Hmmm.... I think I tried to say that human standards were relative so how the heck would I give a "definition" for something which varies? Did you even read what I wrote or do you have a habit of talking about "cults"?

Anyways even if we were ruled by cults or whatever; the question is about "evil" and "justice", if you can't think outside of the "cults" then what the hell is the point of discussing any topic related to "justice" and "evil"? All I said was justice and evil are relative, and that would include all cults, all non-cults, and you (as if you're special )

Peace be unto you

 

[(Q)]

lol! Take two seconds to breath, then reread his statement. That's not what he's saying.

Yes, it is.

But seriously, you seem to me to be just as dangerous as theists based on your strong fallicious statements.

I'm dangerous because I want cults to disappear. hahahahaha!

If we want to save the world, we are going to have to come together and respect the fact that there is no proof of god, and there is no proof of the lack of a god. So, everyone is entitled to their opinion within the bounds on civilized behavior and mutual respect. It is those on the far side of each position that are dangerous to the world.

It is those who fantasize about the supernatural and use it to forward their agendas that are dangerous to the world, pal. Anyone who does so deserves not an iota of respect.

 

[lightgigantic]

At the very least told us not to fret about what seems unjust, and to trust him. The Bible says this. So, if God were real and it appeared to be the same God talked about in the Bible, I would have faith.

So again, this discussion is going nowhere because it assumes that God is real. If God were real, we'd not be having this discussion.



The keyword is living, of course.

So, I guess if God from the Bible were real, I guess I would judge him as just in the face of calamity, needless death, and murder.

The only problem I have with that is man that is a lot of trust to put in something. I mean what if it was an elaborate scheme by a god to control its creation. Well, at that point, we would be oblivious to right and wrong, so it doesn't matter. At the point we have complete trust in God, there is no longer right and wrong, but only God's way or not (from our perspective).

I think for the purposes of discussion you have to decide whether you are prepared to work with "If there is a god" before embarking on "If there is a just god"

 

[(Q)]

Sin is what destroys and atheists and theists are equally afflicted.

Theists most certainly are "afflicted" with something. Their tenure on this earth is long past due. They have eradicated many of the worlds species, polluted the environment with their greed and folly and have offered to the world their "morals and values" that have left mankind in it's current state, justified by their good books.

Sin? Theists have yet to sin.

 

[jayleew]

Yes, it is.

I don't agree. That's not the way I read his statement. Guess he'll have to chime in and clarify exactly what he meant.

I'm dangerous because I want cults to disappear. hahahahaha!

You said it.

You call them cults, I call them clubs. What is dangerous is that you want them to not exist. Are you afraid of them? What fuels this desire you have to have them eliminated?

It is those who fantasize about the supernatural and use it to forward their agendas that are dangerous to the world, pal. Anyone who does so deserves not an iota of respect.

Equally, it is also those who fear what they don't understand that are dangerous. It is also those who have no tolerance for diversity who are dangerous. It is also those who think they have it all figured out (theists and atheists included). Pride is a very dangerous thing. Intolerance can be a dangerous thing.

Beliefs and character are two different things.

 

[jayleew]

Theists most certainly are "afflicted" with something. Their tenure on this earth is long past due. They have eradicated many of the worlds species, polluted the environment with their greed and folly and have offered to the world their "morals and values" that have left mankind in it's current state, justified by their good books.

Sin? Theists have yet to sin.

You give theists too much credit, but I also notice that you did not disagree with Lori's statement that theists and atheists are equally afflicted.

 

[(Q)]

You call them cults, I call them clubs. What is dangerous is that you want them to not exist. Are you afraid of them? What fuels this desire you have to have them eliminated?

Equally, it is also those who fear what they don't understand that are dangerous. It is also those who have no tolerance for diversity who are dangerous. It is also those who think they have it all figured out (theists and atheists included). Pride is a very dangerous thing. Intolerance can be a dangerous thing.

Beliefs and character are two different things.

Sorry, but it appears you're rather clueless about the world around you. If the cults you defend were tolerant, things would be very different.

Diversity? Hilarious. This isn't diversity, it's dementia.

 

[(Q)]

You give theists too much credit, but I also notice that you did not disagree with Lori's statement that theists and atheists are equally afflicted.

There's no such thing as atheists. That's merely a label theists made up to give their spirits and supernatural world some validity. Lori is insane, so to agree with her insanity wouldn't be very sane.

 

[spidergoat]

It is also those who have no tolerance for diversity who are dangerous.

Yeah, it was our intolerance of Nazis that made Europe such a dangerous place in the mid 40's.

 

[S.A.M.]

Has anyone defined "just" yet?

 

[one_raven]

Has anyone defined "just" yet?

No.
I tried to address that...

Pain exists because pleasure exists - what we do with these two things is our choice.
The "justice" built into that equation is that we suffer if we choose to do wrong.

...but it went pretty much ignored.

 

[jayleew]

Sorry, but it appears you're rather clueless about the world around you. If the cults you defend were tolerant, things would be very different.

I appear clueless to you, does that mean I am clueless? I agree, most religious "cults" are not very tolerant because their deity is not tolerant either. And that ticks me off, but I'm not going around wishing their non-existence, that would make me no better than they (the possessed theist whom checks their rationality at the door.)

Diversity? Hilarious. This isn't diversity, it's dementia.

Maybe you are right. Does that make it the truth? You can't test the whole theist population for dementia...so what, are we to take your word that theists are demented?

The blabberings of the prideful theists are infuriating sometimes, but that doesn't qualify for dementia.

 

[S.A.M.]

No.
I tried to address that...

...but it went pretty much ignored.

Ah I see. There is an argument going on here, but beyond a lot of angry people insisting their right to define everyone else's version of heaven, I don't see much progress.

What would a just God look like? Would everyone perform Kumbaya endlessly until they died of boredom? No wait death =bad. So not allowed to die.

What would be the value of such an existence? Perhaps a mass lobotomy would generate the same feeling?

 

[jayleew]

There's no such thing as atheists. That's merely a label theists made up to give their spirits and supernatural world some validity. Lori is insane, so to agree with her insanity wouldn't be very sane.

You are deflecting, you still have not offered any rebuttal of Lori's statement that theists and atheists suffer from the same affliction.

Who cares where the word atheist came from, most people know what it means today.

Lori is just misunderstood. I don't necessarily agree with her, but there is some truth to things she says.

If you don't want to admit she is right, that's fine, i'm just saying you did not disagree.

 

[jayleew]

No.
I tried to address that...

...but it went pretty much ignored.

The word "just" here is not defined by the OP, so I believe we are using the general definition of what is ethical, good, or right to do in accordance with human rights. Specifically, the right to live relatively normal lives in terms of pain and suffering from any person (or self) involved in circle of influence.