Searching for GOD...

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Hillside I may be the maleficent little goblin...

Well, you said it.

...infesting your nightmares...

Not a chance.

...but even I have been calling for alternative histories. I even congratulated you on your alternatives.

Alternative histories and alternative possibilities are not the same thing at all: a history is what happened; a possibility is what could have happened. You were peddlling a false binary, and I explained why it was false. No more, no less.

The point is that all I am putting forward is the historical records we have.

No you're not. First, "historical records" actually means something, and what it means is a long way from hearsay, myth, faith belief etc.

Second, if you think there was a supernatural resurrection then you're on a fool's errand in any case. "Historical records" are a naturalistic method - attempting to jemmy that method onto a supposedly supernatural event is a basic category error. What method you would use to validate a supernatural (whatever that means) event is anyone's guess, but the burden of poof rests with those who would posit such a thing.

That is no more me attempting a false binary...

You attempted a false binary several times when you posited either a conspiracy or a resurrection. When you demanded other options, I gave them to you.

...than it was me doing a survivor bias...

That was exactly what you attempted when you demanded to know how a community would have survived it its beliefs hadn't been true.

...or an argumentum ad consequentium. If you think I have please quote me doing one.

One of your favourite fallacies. I've pointed it out to you several times in recent posts, only for you to ignore the falsification every time. Do you not think it a bit rich to ask me now to go back to them to point them out again?

[Rhiannon]

You seem to forget that He Himself suffered torture and death to save us from our sins.

Just stop and think how stupidly unjust and ridiculous that is.

[BeRational]

Just stop and think how stupidly unjust and ridiculous that is.

Plus, it's just a story and not a fact.

[Rhiannon]

Plus, it's just a story and not a fact.

And not even a good one. You'd think there'd be a story about a god who just forgave everyone anyway, 'cause that's what loving gods do, right?

[Stranger]

Our conscious choices are certainly not random.  So in the materialistic scenario the cause of a conscious choice gets traced back through all the "cause and effect" events to the beginning of time.  And if our perceived conscious choices are pre determined, there is no real need for conscious awareness.

Not determined and not random is still a contradiction, no matter if it's "materialistic" or not.

Scientist claim there is no discernable cause for certain quantum events, but these events are not random.  We rely on the probability of specific quantum events occurring at the right time and place to achieve stability at the atomic level.  So we ponder the question:  What controls quantum events?

Observables in quantum mechanics are probabilistic - so they have determined probabilities and the variation of individual events within those probabilities is random.

[BeRational]

And not even a good one. You'd think there'd be a story about a god who just forgave everyone anyway, 'cause that's what loving gods do, right?

A nice God would I agree.

What does this say about the Christian God who could not forgive without some barbaric price being paid?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

A nice God would I agree.

What does this say about the Christian God who could not forgive without some barbaric price being paid?

Firstly the person paying the 'barbaric price' is God.

Secondly if you truly forgive you are bearing the whole penalty of what ever happened.
That's why it's easier to use the words rather than do the actual thing...and it is also hard to realise what being truly forgiven means.

[BeRational]

Firstly the person paying the 'barbaric price' is God.

Secondly if you truly forgive you are bearing the whole penalty of what ever happened.
That's why it's easier to use the words rather than do the actual thing...and it is also hard to realise what being truly forgiven means.

So God feels no pain then so why do we care?

[Stranger]

Firstly the person paying the 'barbaric price' is God.

Which is beyond absurd. It really is a totally ridiculous story. God makes us so that we are unable to live up to its standard and then inflicts a barbaric punishment on itself in order to forgive us - but only if we believe in this nonsense...

[Rhiannon]

Firstly the person paying the 'barbaric price' is God.

But, getting all doctrinal here, it is God the Son, not God the Father. It is God as Man who cries out on the across, 'My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?' The suffering there is a very human suffering, not the suffering of divinity.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

But, getting all doctrinal here, it is God the Son, not God the Father. It is God as Man who cries out on the across, 'My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?' The suffering there is a very human suffering, not the suffering of divinity.

Since you are getting all doctrinal here perhaps you can explain how God the son is not God.

Also you are completely in my view ignoring what it is that is causing the suffering.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Which is beyond absurd. It really is a totally ridiculous story. God makes us so that we are unable to live up to its standard and then inflicts a barbaric punishment on itself in order to forgive us - but only if we believe in this nonsense...

I don't think you understand forgiveness (see my previous post)
You need to check the story to see who is inflicting what pain here.

[Stranger]

I don't think you understand forgiveness (see my previous post)

Why does everybody need forgiveness?

You need to check the story to see who is inflicting what pain here.

Omnipotent and omniscient means omni-responsible.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Why does everybody need forgiveness?

Omnipotent and omniscient means omni-responsible.

We are responsible for what we have done are we not....or are you pleading some diminished responsibility.
We would have had to have done absolutely everybody including ourselves right not to need forgiveness.
The consequences of not doing right is alienation which only forgiveness can put right. If we do not understand forgiveness then we are alienated from it.

[Rhiannon]

Since you are getting all doctrinal here perhaps you can explain how God the son is not God.

Also you are completely in my view ignoring what it is that is causing the suffering.

Oh come on, you know that God on the Cross is God as a human being? It's not so simple as saying that God does this to himself. He doesn't.

The cause of the suffering on the cross was the barbarity of Roman law and punishment. What do you think it is?

[Stranger]

We are responsible for what we have done are we not....or are you pleading some diminished responsibility.
We would have had to have done absolutely everybody including ourselves right not to need forgiveness.
The consequences of not doing right is alienation which only forgiveness can put right. If we do not understand forgiveness then we are alienated from it.

You really don't see how utterly silly this is, do you? If there is 100% failure rate, that isn't a choice, it's a design flaw. Either humans are badly designed or the test is badly designed for humans - either way it would be your god's fault.

And that's before we get into the absurdity of the idea of any sort of "free will" from the point of view of an omnipotent and omniscient creator...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Oh come on, you know that God on the Cross is God as a human being? It's not so simple as saying that God does this to himself. He doesn't.

The cause of the suffering on the cross was the barbarity of Roman law and punishment. What do you think it is?

I thought you studied theology which is why you are drawing on the human/divine dichotomy so you I think you know that the pain of the crucifixion was a bit wider than the pain of the barbarity of Roman law and includes the barbarity of human sin.

Unfortunately Secular Humanism has relegated human sin to sneaking the odd After Eight mint...and what religious people do.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You really don't see how utterly silly this is, do you? If there is 100% failure rate, that isn't a choice, it's a design flaw. Either humans are badly designed or the test is badly designed for humans - either way it would be your god's fault.

And that's before we get into the absurdity of the idea of any sort of "free will" from the point of view of an omnipotent and omniscient creator...

I'm afraid the free will thing has been relegated by posters like yourself to talking yourselves up your own fundements and creating a homunculus.

You are confusing design with how you are operating which it seems is not on all cylinders. I think the problem is with your definition of omnipotence which weirdly forbids god from creating that with any responsibility.

[Rhiannon]

I thought you studied theology which is why you are drawing on the human/divine dichotomy so you I think you know that the pain of the crucifixion was a bit wider than the pain of the barbarity of Roman law and includes the barbarity of human sin.

Unfortunately Secular Humanism has relegated human sin to sneaking the odd After Eight mint...and what religious people do.

No, I studied theology but I don't believe in the things that I learned. The cause of the cross is simply the fact that a good man upset the wrong people. That's is we accept that Jesus was a historical figure.

Sin is a dirty concept designed to control through bullying and humiliation. No god of love would want his or her followers to have this as a part of their lives.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Vlad,

I like the odd after eight mint, alright!! alright! I confess, I am not happy unless I polish off the whole damn box, the big box!! are you happy, I am a complete sinner.

Gonnagle.

PS: The other thing, I am contemplating!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No, I studied theology but I don't believe in the things that I learned. The cause of the cross is simply the fact that a good man upset the wrong people. That's is we accept that Jesus was a historical figure.

Sin is a dirty concept designed to control through bullying and humiliation. No god of love would want his or her followers to have this as a part of their lives.

You say sin is a dirty concept and then promptly identify three of them.

We all know the maxim of love that if you love something you let it free.

The parable of the Prodigal son I believe is a scriptural equivalent.

God wants us to come back to him that is the point of God's enduring of self alienation of the crucifixion.

[Sebastian Toe]

What rubbish. Resign from the board.

For how long?
Indefinitely?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Dear Vlad,

I like the odd after eight mint, alright!! alright! I confess, I am not happy unless I polish off the whole damn box, the big box!! are you happy, I am a complete sinner.

Gonnagle.

PS: The other thing, I am contemplating!

Yes I'm afraid it starts with After Eight mints and before you know it your onto the Aldi equivalent of Matchmakers..

[Sebastian Toe]

Since you are getting all doctrinal here perhaps you can explain how God the son is not God.

Why don't you ask Sassy?
She will gladly I'm sure show you why that is a FACT.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

For how long?
Indefinitely?

At least he could make the effort.