God: Benevolent or Malevolent?

...and I'm not holding my breath on even that.

A few times, the thread got quiet or went to a less controversial topic, there was always a member that turned on the flamethrower.

I'll repeat it again: there is no rational reason to keep this war (that's what it is) going. Beating the other side into admission, giving up or converting is not going to happen. That leaves people to draw bad conclusions like bullying or some other issue.

 

You mean you've been stuck in the FHOP forum this long?!!

If you took a 6 year detour, this is the proper forum you should be going to for learning about your Prius (though your ID says you're not a Toyota driver...did you have a Prius and dumped it because you detoured to FHOP instead?):

Gen II (2004-2009) Toyota Prius Forums - PriusChat Forums

I started on this site to learn about my brand new Prius, I now mainly check out FHOP because my Prius is no longer new.

 

Hysterical. Just exactly the rationalization I was talking about. Thanks.

I especially liked the part about 'cohabiting'. Doesn't the Bible mention God getting another man's wife pregnant. Maybe He should be denying the truth in any religion.

 

Davesrose, active for a little over a year - before that saw the senseless fights.

I have a 2000 Honda Insight, but down the line may get a Toyota and back in 2006 wanting to know more about the HSD.

 

Not at all sure what you mean by "non-theistic" evolution. Evolution means change. The evidence is that populations change due to natural causes. Natural selection was the discovery that put evolution on a scientific basis. The assertion that natural selection is an "extraordinary claim" is preposterous. And in fact, the evidence for natural selection is overwhelming. Darwin published a mountain of evidence in Origin of Species, and further evidence has just continued to mount.

Natural selection is NOT an extraordinary claim, but it IS supported by extraordinary evidence.

Evolution directed by a god or other supernatural force, on the other hand, has zero evidence behind it. Just unfounded claims based on an allegorical myth from a very old book.

This is Fred's House of Pancakes, the off-topic forum of Prius Chat. I don't believe there is a better source of information anywhere about the Prius than the car forums on Prius Chat.

Speaking for myself, my reason for attacking religion is not contempt. It's true I have contempt for religion. But my reason for spending time in the dispute is the pernicious effect of religion throughout history, and the present-day war on education, rationality, and human rights being conducted in the name of religion.

Chuck would like me to be silent as laws are passed to require teachers to turn science classes into religious revivals and fundamentalists conduct campaigns to oppose marriage equality. The notion that I should shut up has become a big theme for him.

I've said it before: What you believe, and what you practice in your own home, is your business. But when people try to foist their religion on the rest of us, then I stand up for the Constitution and the separation of church and state.

This is not even a religion vs. secularism/atheism quarrel. This is a quarrel of fundamentalist religion against the supporters of the separation of church and state, which includes moderate and liberal religions as well as secularists and atheists. It was religious people who insisted that government stay out of religion, to protect themselves from persecution by bigger religious groups. Throughout history, Christians have mostly killed other Christians, and the people who came here to get away from that wanted a secular government so they could follow their own religions in peace. But sadly, fundamentalists have never accepted that idea, and are set on forcing their own narrow interpretations on the rest of us, atheists and moderate believers alike.

 

Joesph and Mary were betrothed at that point.

 

You have got to be kidding.

Please tell me you do not take that rubbish seriously.
You may not have noticed, but the priests that engage in pedophilia, or torture their congregation, or starve the natives, or march to war or .... or .... or ... any of the multitudes of depravations and travesties the religious engage in daily are washed aside in a blink of the eye and a quick "I'm not perfect, but at least I believe." LOL

If religion is good at anything, it is hypocrisy.

 

Some believe in God and and in evolution - others do not believe in God, while believing in evolution.

Daniel, said it a number of times: In person and outside PC I deal with this topic a lot better. The assertion I want you to "shut up" is not exactly accurate....but the constant agitation on this topic is too much.

Another inaccuracy is spinning yourself as only being against fundamentalists - you have attacked all religion.

And ironically in your last post you bring up the political aspect leaving no doubt this is a Fred's House of Politics thread while implictly arguing it should not go there.

 

You missed your calling... you should have been a psychiatrist.

I do agree with one of your points... I don't think it is futile or at least a waste discussing these topics... I have done a great deal of Bible studying due to these threads. Thanks guys!

 

Spin - it's more than us two - just skim the last twenty posts.

You are living this fantasy that FHOP is a crossection of the real world.

If I were equally as rude and arrogant as some here, you would be protesting even more than you already are.

You are an intelligent man - is telling the other side their viewpoint is dangerous and stupid going to win anyone over?...this is the same kind of disrespect that puts threads in Fred's House of Politics.

Just as you claim my protests indicates doubt, I can point to your larger body of work of your paranoia with fundamentalist conspiracies.

Has disrespecting other viewpoints gained you respect and credibility?

Anything you disagree with you confidently deny - God, spirit, lifeforce, probably near-death experiences, the universe consisting of more than materials, medical research that indicates humans predisposed to a belief in God, complexity in nature that demands some intelligence. Some of these denials simply are not proven.

 

I assert that these exchanges are futile only for those firmly entrenched. The hard line believers will continue to believe and the hard line non-believers will continue to be baffled and amazed by the believers. That's not going to change.

Where these exchanges are useful is for others that are on the fence, and for anyone considering what happens when we allow religion into politics, government, and education. That deserves debate, or at least an airing.

Tom

 

Telling me that my "constant agitation [...] is too much" is essentially telling me to stop writing. I'm actually encouraged by this, because it suggests to me that you have no rational answers to my arguments.

Not quite. I argue against all religion. I only attack those who use their religion to deny human rights to others, or to impose their narrow dogmas on the rest of us, or to use their religion to promote war and violence.

The mere mention of matters relating to politics is not enough to consign a thread to the Politics forum. In the car forums the topics of gas taxes, HOV lane access, incentives for efficient cars, etc., come up all the time. The Politics forum deals with discussions of the relative merits of candidates and parties, not discussions of public policies. I have brought up the public policy issue of religion in the classroom. That's a far cry from advocating one party or candidate over another.

Of course you are free to PM a mod if you disagree with me.

Cool.

Exactly. I participate in these discussions, not to convert people like Chuck or Spiderman. I do it for the lurkers, the fence-sitters, and especially the people trapped in extremist religious families or communities who need to know that not everybody accepts or kow tows to fundamentalist extremism.

I've read accounts of people who've found the strength to escape from fundamentalism because of on-line skeptical communities. The Bible is full of contradictory statements about and descriptions of god, and fundamentalist sects pound into children that they must not question any of the contradictory and often cruel dogmas. When a person has begun to question what sort of a god would do some of the things in the Bible, it can be very helpful to find people, in person or on line, arguing cogently that the Bible is just a collection of mythology, poetry, and some history, and need not be taken literally. In fact, cannot be taken literally without abandoning all logic and common sense.

And to Chuck, as I've said before: You can participate in the discussion, or you can ignore it, but you cannot tell others to shut up. And complaining that you're tired of it is a waste of breath.

 

We can not convert, we do not have that ability only the Truth and do that. We are here to deliver the good news of the Gospel and perhaps correct those that might twist, belittle, misquote, etc the scriptures to further their religion.:mod:

Didn't mean to speak for you Chuck... please correct me if I am wrong.

 

Ouch... must have hit a nerve here. Must be time for a poll.

 

Daniel,

Your opinion has a way of reading things into the Bible and posts like mine that are simply not factual - fairy tales you might say.

One thing that will be evident to the fence sitters is this topic owns you, AirportKid and others and it's emotional as your leave of absence a year ago testifies. This obsession is not consistent with someone sure of their conviction, but the opposite. The English Wikipedia lists people by belief pretty well, and many that became irreligious did so as a result of an emotional experience rather than a thought out one...overly strict and unloving parents, people that adopt a lifestyle condemned in the Bible for instance. You might like to think Lenin came to atheism as the result of a study, but it was his reaction to the Czar's executing his brother > Vladimir Lenin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (not the source that points out his loss of faith, but does point out the emotional impact of his brother's death)



But if you want to believe you have high Emotional Intelligence - go ahead.

 

One of the most absurd arguments against religion is blaming the church, generally the Roman Catholic Church for starting wars and persecutions like the Inquisition, and taking a blind eye to state atheist governments under Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Eastern Europe - 100 million roughly dead. The morality was whatever promoted communism, which rationalized purges, starvation such as the Holodrome, governments that had no human rights whatsoever.

 

Nothing to do with the war comment, but....it took the Roman Catholic church until 1992 to forgive Galileo for the heresy of believing Earth revolved around the Sun. That's three hundred and fifty-something years, from the people who preach forgiveness. Now, that's absurd.

 

The Church forgave the inquisitors a lot quicker.

Actually, that is not true. The Church has never thought the inquisitors required forgiveness.

 

Blind eye to secular atrocities ? Not for a moment. I view those dictators as monsters.

How do you view the depravities of the Churches ?