- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Well we can prove prove definitively that the boogey man isn't real. Can you do the same with God?
I'm certain you can't. You are plain just making a poker bluff, then deluding yourself into thinking the other guy couldn't possibly have the cards to clean you out since you can't see him.
You are wrong in many ways:
1. In the bible God destroy the world fora purpose. To get rid of sin. That already lays to waste your first accusation.
2. God of the bible can't abide sin and disobedience. So if you hate him and deliberately sin against him and disobey his laws he will punish you and everything connected with you. As long as it takes until down the line you and your kind quit hating him. That isn't being evil. That is being just. the long arm of the has has no mercy on those who insist on breaking the law generation in generation out.
3.n the bible. God didn't encourage war for the sake. He encouraged war to enforce justice on the wicked. If you call the evil by definition you are claiming justice is evil.
4. God smites population because of their sin. The same way the law treats criminals who have committed crimes. He doesn't smite them for the fun of it. Just for the justice of it. To equate that to evil means you once again you must think justice to be evil.
5. God in the bible accepts sacrifice in his name because only spilled blood could fully atone for sin. For the wages of sin are death. The sinner had to die or someone or something else had to die in the sinners place in order for sin to be atoned for.
Sacrifice was the equivalent of someone paying a fine to escape jail To call it evil makes no sense. Unless you think paying a fine to stay out of jail is evil.
6. You claim ''The god of the bible represents everything we as a people have learned to despise in our culture''. Very wrong. What we have learned to despise in our cultures is evil for the sake of evil. Not justice that uses evil things like capital punishment or the psychological pain of a jail cell to enforce
It thus utterly false to make this claim
''In other words, people accept his evil because he is an authority, not because he is good.''
God is not evil. God is just. People accept his authority because he is objective and doesn't use our standards to judge but the ultimate ones, for which the prices to pay are very heavy indeed when justice is implemented.
You argument is weak for 2 simple reasons.
1. Jesus was not born on the 25th. That date was instituted by Constantine I to harmonize religions in the Roman Empire and as Christianity eventually became the dominant religion in the empire, that date became accepted as the one to celebrate his birth. So he is the odd man out in your list.
2. Lets look at Horus directly the on Jesus is claimed to be a direct copy of:
i. Horus’ mother was not a virgin. She was married to Osiris, and there is no reason to suppose she was abstinent after marriage. Horus was, per the story, miraculously conceived.
ii. Acharya's footnotes don't provide evidence for the claim of Isis being a virgin or for "Meri" being part of her name. Only Christ-mythers make the claim that "Meri" was part of her name.
iii. Horus was never crucified. There’s an unofficial story in which he dies and is cast in pieces into the water, then later fished out by a crocodile at Isis’ request. This unofficial story is the only one in which he dies at all.
iv. Jesus was an actual person who the Romans crucified. Even if you don't believe he was more than a man. His divinity can be in doubt but his existence and being human can't. It is a historical fact he was human that actually walked the Earth. The same can't be said for these other gods.
Spot on . Science can not be in conflict with God because science is what he used to make the universe function. We as humans study his work without knowing every single aspect of it. For we are incapable of seeing every point in time and examining every single point in the universe we live in.
1) He is immoral.
''He commits genocide by flooding the earth and destroying everybody alive. ''
A God committing a so called ''immorality'' like genocide is a logical impossibility. If God is God and thus really created man, he can do what he sees fit with him. He is not subject to the slaw customs, or tenets of man's realm. Calling it genocide makes no sense. No more than you would say a computer programmer who created a virtual world game where millions of characters are killed because he wills it has committed genocide. God in short can do as he sees fit with man. For the potter can not tell the call make me in such and such a way. So the moment you use a term like immoral on God, then it can't be god you are talking about. For it is he who states what is moral not that which he has made.
2. Your argument assumes God has no choice in what he does. As in:
a) since he is omnipotent, he must do everything regardless of whether its a logical impossibility.
b) since he is all loving he must only act out of love. He can never do otherwise.
c) Since he know everything, is all loving he must have the desire to eliminate veil and must eliminate it.
All these three arguments strip God of the ability to choose anything and any alternate courses of action. Basically they make no sense. For if the so called God can't choose what he does then he isn't God at all. So that type of God certainly doesn't exist and no religion on Earth believes in him either.
Assuming that because evil exist God can't is a weak argument.
It doesn't take into account why evil exits. For if evil exit by definition it is the antithesis of good and a disobedience to God's rules at its core. However because himself has free will and it is claimed he created man to have similar free will, there would be no point in God eliminating all evil in the world even if he had a desire to. Because that would mean no one would be able to freely choose whether to do good or evil.
Unless any argument take into account the ability for any all powerful God to chose what he does, when and how. These so called paradoxes concerning his possible existence will never make sound sense.
Spot on. Humans trying to understand what God is fail simply because they try to describe him in terms that humans are constrained by. Things like time, space, limit and ignorance. If God is there he isn't constrained by such things. So he can be every where at the same time and know everything there is to know, and because he is all knowing he won't do that which makes no sense for him to do. In short he would be the ultimate expression of free will. He would only do that which he decides, which would be based on perfect reason and perfect logic.
You are spot on. The paradox works on the principle of assuming power to do everything comes with the power to do illogical and stupid things. An all knowing and all powerful being can't do that which makes no sense. Plain and simple. If he has all the power he can never do that which makes him powerless.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!