• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

DERAIL: So the Crucifixion - What's up with that?

God doesn't exist because He doesn't do what I think He would do if He existed.
That's anthropomorphism.

Well, if God did exist, what do you think he would do? How would one go about verifying claims of God's existence?

If you're talking about the Christian God, then we can use moral behavior to validate the claims of his existence since eating the apple gave humans the same ability to recognize good and evil that God has, so our views of that sort of behavior would have at least a passing similarity to his views of that sort of behavior.

For instance, if I see somebody raping a young child, I will stand back and watch while doing nothing to prevent it because I feel that it would be evil to interfere with the rapist's exercise of his free will. If I saw some sort of divine intervention occurring to spare the child getting raped, I would know that the intervener was someone other than God because God doesn't do evil things like preventing child rape.
 
God doesn't exist because He doesn't do what I think He would do if He existed.
That's anthropomorphism.

God doesn't exist because he doesn't do anything at all, including (but not limited to) the things theists claim he will do, nor the things it is implied he should do by theists' claims about his character, knowledge and abilities.

That's reality.
 
Christianity anthropomorphized him first, so yes any critique will be of an anthropomorphized god.
 
When I look at images of Christ the King of Calvary they don't look like something an ordinary 'human' would to do.
How have we anthropomorphised God at Golgotha?
 
You're arguing Jesus was not in human form? What then? A muskrat?
 
When I look at images of Christ the King of Calvary they don't look like something an ordinary 'human' would to do.
How have we anthropomorphised God at Golgotha?

What, get executed? Lots of people do that. Many of them also take it like a man and don't whine and cry about how God's forsaken them and other weak-assed shit like that.

If you want to know how a god would handle that situation, imagine a group of Romans trying to drag Thor off and stick him on a cross. You'd have a bunch of dead-assed Romans is what you'd have. Thor's never been one to take much bullshit.

You probably had a completely different point with that post, but it appears to be based on an internal Christian reference that most of us didn't recognize and we don't know what you're going for. Could you explain what the reference was supposed to mean and why you're using a human interpretation of Jesus's actions in order to explain that meaning.
 
When I look at images of Christ the King of Calvary they don't look like something an ordinary 'human' would to do.
How have we anthropomorphised God at Golgotha?
You're right that it isn't an ordinary human death - like when people actually die. It's fake heroic death, like in movies, full of emotional appeal and meant to entertain. People who buy into this crap need a real life, not this phony breast-beating.
 
My point is that atheists arguing what God is not, or what God cannot be, are bringing their own anthropomorphism to the table. I say God is loving because He does somthing I find to be loving. The counter-apologist argues that God is not loving because of their own ideas about what a loving God would/should do.

Fuck you. I have a close friend who's kid got leukaemia. How dare you even hint at that God is good. If he exists he's obviously the most evil entity known to humanity.

Your attitude sickens me. So callous and wicked. Shame on you
 
This from the person who says Jesus (who healed sick people) never existed and whose miracles were impossible.
You want God to do stuff and yet when He does you wont give Him the credit anyway.
Ingratitude and disbelief.
You have a friend whose child has leukaemia? Go explain to them why leukaemia exists.
 
This from the person who says Jesus (who healed sick people) never existed and whose miracles were impossible.
You want God to do stuff and yet when He does you wont give Him the credit anyway.
Ingratitude and disbelief.
You have a friend whose child has leukaemia? Go explain to them why leukaemia exists.

We know why leukemia exists. It exists because the human body is a shitty half arsed "design". It's pretty obvious that no intelligence was involved.

I don't want God to do anything. If he truly existed I would pray for him to fuck off for good. Just leave us alone. I think he's done enough damage. He can pick on another planet, thank you. I'm pretty sure we'd do just fine without him.

This world is a cruel world. Being grateful for this shit would be perverse. I'm not masochistic enough to thank God
 
I don't see how believing that Jesus healed some people long ago makes the fact that kids today have leukemia any better. If anything, it makes gratitude toward God even more difficult, in that it proves that he's very selective. Pray for God to heal your child, and--if Jesus happens to be in town--it just might happen. Pray for God to heal your child in any other time or place, however, and you get to watch her suffer and die a painful and frightening death.
 
I don't see how believing that Jesus healed some people long ago makes the fact that kids today have leukemia any better. If anything, it makes gratitude toward God even more difficult, in that it proves that he's very selective. Pray for God to heal your child, and--if Jesus happens to be in town--it just might happen. Pray for God to heal your child in any other time or place, however, and you get to watch her suffer and die a painful and frightening death.
I saw a guy in a shirt that said "god first, then family..." No further explanation needed to understand why people put their children second. Their gods must command it.

Kinda selfish, especially knowing that their loving, heroic spaceman is something less than fantasy.
 
I wonder about a God who, when looking down on a five-year-old girl crying in pain, her body riddled with cancer, would then say, "Sorry, kiddo. I'd love to heal you and end your suffering, but atheists wouldn't give me the credit if I did. So you're just going to have to deal with it."
 
I wonder about a God who, when looking down on a five-year-old girl crying in pain, her body riddled with cancer, would then say, "Sorry, kiddo. I'd love to heal you and end your suffering, but atheists wouldn't give me the credit if I did. So you're just going to have to deal with it."
That was Self-Mutation's argument, some of the time.
God apparently won't do shit if it doesn't add to his glory.

And yet, apparently 'cancer remission' is just a term people invented so they wouldn't have to credit God for those miracle cancer cures... That are limited to certain kinds of cancer... And aren't all that miraculous... But are caused by the god who won't lift a hand if he won't get credit...

Very confusing, really, being a theist.

Much easier to just say 'shit happens,' innit?
 
I wonder about a God who, when looking down on a five-year-old girl crying in pain, her body riddled with cancer, would then say, "Sorry, kiddo. I'd love to heal you and end your suffering, but atheists wouldn't give me the credit if I did. So you're just going to have to deal with it."
Are some hardcore believers trying to overcome a less than ideal childhood, is belief an attempt to overcome the scars? It's as if they're saying "your turn to suffer, I had mine." How else does one explain putting family second?

My parents loved me and my family was close. I never needed gods, even though I had your typical religious upbringing.
 
God doesn't exist because He doesn't do what I think He would do if He existed.
That's anthropomorphism.

No it isn't... you are using the word incorrectly. And furthermore, Atheists challenge Theists with the conflicting inconsistencies in Theists' own claims. Atheists are not "assigning human traits on an inanimate, or otherwise non-agent, thing" - which is what Anthropomorphising is. They are simply saying, IF you (Theist) says X AND you also say Y, then how do you explain Z? It is just logic, using the prepositions Theists themselves assert.
 
God doesn't exist because He doesn't do what I think He would do if He existed.
That's anthropomorphism.

No it isn't... you are using the word incorrectly. And furthermore, Atheists challenge Theists with the conflicting inconsistencies in Theists' own claims. Atheists are not "assigning human traits on an inanimate, or otherwise non-agent, thing" - which is what Anthropomorphising is. They are simply saying, IF you (Theist) says X AND you also say Y, then how do you explain Z? It is just logic, using the prepositions Theists themselves assert.

Anthropomorphism is assigning the idea of there being a God that is personal, intelligent, has will, and emotions. An angry God, Jealous God, a God that loves us, or love Jacob but hates Esau and so on.

Theologians have struggled with these concepts for centuries? Does God have emotions? Or is that anthropomorphization? Google Impassibility of God for details. If God does not have emotions like humans, what does God have? Is God like giant cosmic Spock, or a logical but emotionless computer? What evidence do we have for anything, other than supposed revelations?
 
Good grief, Genesis 8 tells us that God has nostrils and enjoys the smell of burning meat. Talk about anthropomorphism.

Unless, of course, we're not supposed to take that passage literally.
 
This from the person who says Jesus (who healed sick people) never existed and whose miracles were impossible.
You want God to do stuff and yet when He does you wont give Him the credit anyway.
Ingratitude and disbelief.
You have a friend whose child has leukaemia? Go explain to them why leukaemia exists.

Because god wanted that child to be born so he could suffer here on earth, only to die without any perceivable rhyme or reason, obviously!
 
Back
Top Bottom