hey athiests! i'm chatting with a person from liberty university on yahoo

[Boris Godunov]

But something in all that meat must make rightists not care about children after they're born, since they're so eager to see them get bombed across the globe...

[GePap]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Most leftist vegans I know prefer to kill their own unborn children than eat meat. I would prefer that they just had a good a hamburger...

I am sure they would support the decision of any cows to kill their own unborn calves.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by GePap
Does anyone here have any valid arguements that show that the Monotheistic God everyone here is talking about is more valid than the pantheon of Hindu gods, more valid than animist beliefs, or the spiritual belief system of any native American tribe you decide to focus on, or Buddhism?

The God of the Bible is only known by revelation so it is fruitless to try to prove his existence. I usually do not try and prove that any particular god exists, only the concept of a creator of some type.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by GePap
NOT Heretic, Infidel.

That is what gets me about this particular debate: people alwasy paint it as science v. Monotheistic God, but the fact is that monotheism is only ONE religious school of thought..fine, the most popular but not the only one. The monotheistic ideology may very well be wrong, but that does not invalidate religions per say.

I thought the largest religious sect was polytheistic?

Oh sure, the say the trinity is "one god," but does that make any goddamned sense?

Erm, no pun intended.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
But something in all that meat must make rightists not care about children after they're born, since they're so eager to see them get bombed across the globe...

I think it is called survival of the fittest or something like that.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Lincoln
The God of the Bible is only known by revelation so it is fruitless to try to prove his existence. I usually do not try and prove that any particular god exists, only the concept of a creator of some type.

BUt is the creator sentient? And is the creator good and a foundation of morality? That is not agreed upon at all either, and is very different from some of the moral arguements made here.

[Ramo]

Strictly speaking Hinduism could be considered monotheistic. The pantheon of gods is more like the Catholic trinity than most polytheistic religions.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by GePap


BUt is the creator sentient? And is the creator good and a foundation of morality? That is not agreed upon at all either, and is very different from some of the moral arguements made here.

Sometimes I wonder how good he is when I think of some of the hell I have gone through in this life. I do think though that there is a good chance that God looks at things a bit differently than we do. So we will have to wait and see.

The evil on this earth points to God who is not that nice to everyone. So, the God of the Bible seems to fit the bill especially when we consider that the Bible says that the entire creation is fallen corrupt.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ramo
Strictly speaking Hinduism could be considered monotheistic. The pantheon of gods is more like the Catholic trinity than most polytheistic religions.

Interesting, just how independent are the different dieties? casue the trinity is a doozy of a construction (the theologians who came up with that deserve a prize..too bad the Jews and Muslims didn't buy it.)

[GePap]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Sometimes I wonder how good he is when I think of some of the hell I have gone through in this life. I do think though that there is a good chance that God looks at things a bit differently than we do. So we will have to wait and see.

I like Nietzsche's point on punishment: that punishment is proportional to fear: the more fear an act causes to the group or individual, the more harshly they will punish: conversely, the safer and more secure a group or individual feels, the lesser punishemnt will be: if you are not afraid of the possible act, your need to act harshly against it is minimal. In this scheme, the omnipotent being has nothing to fear, since neither their correctness or position in the universe can be challenged: so what would the point of harsh punishement be?

Hell teaches no lessons, it is merely punitive.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Lincoln
I think it is called survival of the fittest or something like that.

I thought it was putting the heathens to the proverbial sword...

[Ramo]

Interesting, just how independent are the different dieties? casue the trinity is a doozy of a construction (the theologians who came up with that deserve a prize..too bad the Jews and Muslims didn't buy it.)

My understanding is that each of gods is a different aspect of the supreme God - Brahma is the creator, Vishnu is the preserver, Shiva is the destroyer. And the minor gods are sort of like saints and angels.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by GePap


I like Nietzsche's point on punishment: that punishment is proportional to fear: the more fear an act causes to the group or individual, the more harshly they will punish: conversely, the safer and more secure a group or individual feels, the lesser punishemnt will be: if you are not afraid of the possible act, your need to act harshly against it is minimal. In this scheme, the omnipotent being has nothing to fear, since neither their correctness or position in the universe can be challenged: so what would the point of harsh punishement be?

Hell teaches no lessons, it is merely punitive.

Maybe God doesn't care what Nietzsche thinks.

[Voltaire]

There are two things you should never debate: taste and religion. No one will ever agree.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Lincoln


Maybe God doesn't care what Nietzsche thinks.

I am sure Nietzsche doesn't care what God thinks either, specially since God died before Nietzsche did.