What does God want?

You're simply no longer worth the effort, Jan. For your sake I hope that you are not as stupid as you're portraying here. But either you are, in which case I am no longer interested in discussing with you when it is clear you don't have the intellectual capacity to grasp rather simple concepts, or you are simply continuing your dishonesty, in which case I no longer have any desire to waste more time on you.

Either way, troll, you have your wish and I'll leave you alone to roll around in your own faeces.
 
Jan Ardena said:
Anne believes in God.
Bob doesn't believe in God.
How is their beliefs not in opposition?
Click to expand...
Because Anne has formed an opinion. It is not a given that Bob has.

A few possible explanations:
- Bob is only 6 months old
- Bob does not dwell on such things
- Bob is open-minded and awaits evidence

Not only are they not in opposition, they are not even mutually exclusive. Bob's lack of belief quite simply does not assert that Anne's belief is, in any way, false.


The opposition to Anne believing in God would be for Bob to hold the belief that God does not exist.
 
Sarkus said:
You're simply no longer worth the effort, Jan. For your sake I hope that you are not as stupid as you're portraying here. But either you are, in which case I am no longer interested in discussing with you when it is clear you don't have the intellectual capacity to grasp rather simple concepts, or you are simply continuing your dishonesty, in which case I no longer have any desire to waste more time on you.
Click to expand...
I like to give people a LOT of rope. I've given no one more rope than Jan.
But I gave up on him a while back.

(Though occasionally I'll check in, under the "faint hope" clause.)

His crime is not stupidity, IMO, but dishonesty.
 
akoreamerican said:
What God wants is for us to better ourselves and pass on those betterment to others
Click to expand...
As do I, and I'm an atheist. Does that make me God after all, or is that moral message a common theme among people of "good will" (not God's will)?

The point is, if God is omnipotent then why does he not wave "the hand of God" and just make it happen? As it stands more crimes have been committed "in the name and blessing of God" than all other crimes combined. How do you propose to square that wih your statement?

Ask yourself if you would be a good person even if God did not exist at all? Or is the message intended only for other people who hold other beliefs? Think about it.

p.s. this chronoloy is already a function of nature itself via evolution and natural selection.
We don't need an alien force to meddle with that process.
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
The point is, if God is omnipotent then why does he not wave "the hand of God" and just make it happen? As it stands more crimes have been committed "in the name and blessing of God" than all other crimes combined. How do you propose to square that wih your statement?
Click to expand...
If God did that it wont be us that is bettering ourselves.

Write4U said:
As do I, and I'm an atheist. Does that make me God after all, or is that moral message a common theme among people of "good will"?
Click to expand...
I don't believe you when you say your an atheist. I think you believe in some form of universal order that could be counted as "God" to you.
 
akoreamerican said:
If God did that it wont be us that is bettering ourselves.
Click to expand...
If it is necessary to better yourself, seems to me that one is starting from a pretty poor position. Great moral behavior can already be found in many non-human species, even as we can't recognize it in our haste to lay blame.
I don't believe you when you say your an atheist. I think you believe in some form of universal order that could be counted as "God" to you.
Click to expand...
Oh, I believe in a hierarchy of orders, but that does not make me a theist (a term which has a very specific definition). It makes me Bohmian Mechanics adherent, but David Bohm never claimed to be God (a term which also has a very specific definition).
 
akoreamerican said:
I don't believe you when you say your an atheist. I think you believe in some form of universal order that
Click to expand...

Another person who knows better than the person themselves who (what) they are

Wish i had a Super Power like that

:)
 
akoreamerican said:
You seem to be assuming something. My definition of God does not include humans. Including jesus
Click to expand...

I thought ALL definitions of god automatically put them outside of being human
Jesus never was human, being the son of god again automatically disqualified him from being human

:)
 
Jan Ardena said:
I'm afraid you're mistaken. Theists are satisfied with the cosmological, teleological evidence, and so on.
Click to expand...
Sure. You're satisfied with it, but you've said yourself that matters of evidence are secondary for you. The belief comes first, the rationalisations afterwards.

Arguably, of course, there is no cosmological or teleological evidence for God. Philosophers have been around that block lots of times, and the usual philosophical arguments for God are all either flawed, or else inconclusive.

The problem is, you cannot specify what you would regard as evidence of God.
Click to expand...
Not very long ago, I took a little time to set out what I would regard as sufficient evidence. Have you forgotten?

Atheists are the ones who are not fussed about evidence. You just reject, and deny.
Click to expand...
Denial requires that something has been established as true. I do not deny anything. I merely do not share your unevidenced faith.

Pushing the onus on the theist, when the theist has already given a rational explanation of their belief, and shown the irrational behaviour of the atheist.
Click to expand...
I must have missed your rational explanation for your theism.

As far as I am aware, you justify your theism on the basis of "I just know God is real, and my magical knowledge proves God is real" and "I think it's natural to believe in God, therefore God is real". Neither of those justifications strikes me as strongly rational. Rationalisations, yes. Rational, no.

And that is all atheists have, faith in their assertions.
Click to expand...
What assertions? You're the one with the big unproven assertion, as far as I can tell.

Attacking theism, is modern atheism. It has no independent values of it's own.
Click to expand...
Correct. Atheism, on its own, isn't a value system. It isn't a system of morals. It isn't a guide for how to live your life. It's not like a religion.

Atheists have to look beyond atheism for guides to morality and the good life.

But you're no different, with your particular personalised brand of theism. Your theism is equally bereft of morality or instructions on how to live a good life. You repeatedly tell us that your belief in God is separate from religion. You tell us that you're not interested in religion, only in theism. One role that religion plays for most people is to add on to theism all that boring baggage about morals and all that. Your theism has no independent values of its own, divorced as you claim it is from religion.
 
I'm more certain of what God isn't than what God is at the moment. That's my way of saying Its way past my bedtime. Bye :leaf::)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top