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

God and freedom

Philos

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2004
Messages
1,451
Location
UK South West
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Folks,

There are those who pay obeisance to the Christian God and yet talk about loving freedom.How can this be?

The Christian God does allow humans to turn away from it’s law, and this is lauded as moral freedom: the ‘free will to reject union with God’. But at what cost?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

The cost is ‘hell’. Now, there is much interpretation and logic chopping about the nature of hell, but one thing we can be sure of, it is a punishment vastly exceeding any earthly sufferings and from which there is no appeal. Can there be dissenters in hell? Is there a way out for those who honestly reject the ‘love’ of a jealous God?

Let us compare this to dissent in other unhappy situations, such as imprisonment in nasty political systems. In these cases we are still free, despite dreadful hardships, to retain our own moral compass. There are many examples, but one is the case of Nelson Mandela on Robben island. Such cases show that it is possible in these earthly sufferings to retain the spark of freedom within ourselves.

No such possibility remains with the Christian God. Reject God in your innermost heart and burn - end of story. It is my suggestion that this is no ‘freedom’ worth the name for such emotional and psychological captives. The Christian believer is locked and chained in moral and spiritual subjection and if they fail to bend the knee to God’s mystery it will destroy them without trace. Cast into the eternal fires like a piece of trash.

Where is the freedom in that?

Alex.
 

ideologyhunter

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
4,800
Location
Port Clinton, Ohio
Basic Beliefs
atheism/beatnikism
They read Gen. 7 & Exod. 12 & Num. 16 and STILL talk about a god of love. So forget them. There's no bridging the gulf between Christian theology and logic. Never. No how.
 

braces_for_impact

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
3,398
Location
Clearwater, FL.
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I agree Philos, but recently I've come to see it as a form of slavery in a much more subtle way. As an atheist myself, like many others here, we've heard over and over again from theists that ask us where our sense of purpose comes from. You may have been asked this yourself. I got to thinking about this and about freedom. Freedom is essentially forming your own sense of purpose and having the ability to follow through and try to make that a reality. The pursuit of happiness right? We have often viewed communist or dictatorial regimes as restrictive to freedom, happiness and generally immoral because they gave you your purpose. They decided your career, your employment, education and so on.

So here we have Christians claiming the same about such political regimes, yet more than willing to hand over their sense of purpose and responsibility to a divine creator in lieu of the government. He made you, so he gets to design your purpose and very reason for existence. Talk about being a willing slave! Here Mr. Imaginary being, please take my core self, and provide me with reasons for being here, no need to think that all up on my own, thank you.

In my view, ceding your purpose to someone else to decide for you is cowardly, childish and evades responsibility. You may as well not be a person, you're a tool to be used for a desired end at that point. Ugh.
 

Tom Sawyer

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 25, 2002
Messages
17,030
Location
Toronto
Basic Beliefs
That I'm God
Freedom is good. God is good. Therefore God loves freedom.

Any Biblical references which seem to contradict this are either being taken out of context or were meant as analogies for something else which doesn't dispute the notion that God loves freedom.
 

doubtingt

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2002
Messages
820
Location
Midwest USA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist/Scientist
Folks,

There are those who pay obeisance to the Christian God and yet talk about loving freedom.How can this be?

They don't actually love freedom, they fear it. Saying you "love freedom" has become just a vacuous platitude akin to "I love America". It is often synonymous with loving the military and the cultural authorities one bows to and thinks are synonymous with another vague notion of "America".

The way to see if a person actually loves freedom is if they support policies to protect minority views against oppression not just by the state but by any social institution. A person person who thinks that obedience to the ultimate unquestionable authority of God is the definition of what is good and moral is by definition the ultimate authoritarian and thus not a supporter of human liberty and freedom. In fact, I think there is good evidence that it is fear of the uncertainty that is inherent to actual freedom that makes people run under the skirt of theism and want God and his authorities to tell them what to do, who to be, and how to feel. If you freely chose these for yourself, you might be wrong, but if you let an infallible authority determine these for you, then (in your own mind) you can't be wrong.
God, religion, and a general affection for "tradition" tends to stem from fear of freedom, and those who adhere to these things tend to seek to squash the freedom of others.
 

Philos

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2004
Messages
1,451
Location
UK South West
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
They don't actually love freedom, they fear it. Saying you "love freedom" has become just a vacuous platitude akin to "I love America". It is often synonymous with loving the military and the cultural authorities one bows to and thinks are synonymous with another vague notion of "America".

The way to see if a person actually loves freedom is if they support policies to protect minority views against oppression not just by the state but by any social institution. A person person who thinks that obedience to the ultimate unquestionable authority of God is the definition of what is good and moral is by definition the ultimate authoritarian and thus not a supporter of human liberty and freedom. In fact, I think there is good evidence that it is fear of the uncertainty that is inherent to actual freedom that makes people run under the skirt of theism and want God and his authorities to tell them what to do, who to be, and how to feel. If you freely chose these for yourself, you might be wrong, but if you let an infallible authority determine these for you, then (in your own mind) you can't be wrong.
God, religion, and a general affection for "tradition" tends to stem from fear of freedom, and those who adhere to these things tend to seek to squash the freedom of others.

doubtingt,

Good words.

Alex.
 

arkirk

Veteran Member
Joined
May 27, 2005
Messages
3,403
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Basic Beliefs
atheist/agnostic
They don't actually love freedom, they fear it. Saying you "love freedom" has become just a vacuous platitude akin to "I love America". It is often synonymous with loving the military and the cultural authorities one bows to and thinks are synonymous with another vague notion of "America".

The way to see if a person actually loves freedom is if they support policies to protect minority views against oppression not just by the state but by any social institution. A person person who thinks that obedience to the ultimate unquestionable authority of God is the definition of what is good and moral is by definition the ultimate authoritarian and thus not a supporter of human liberty and freedom. In fact, I think there is good evidence that it is fear of the uncertainty that is inherent to actual freedom that makes people run under the skirt of theism and want God and his authorities to tell them what to do, who to be, and how to feel. If you freely chose these for yourself, you might be wrong, but if you let an infallible authority determine these for you, then (in your own mind) you can't be wrong.
God, religion, and a general affection for "tradition" tends to stem from fear of freedom, and those who adhere to these things tend to seek to squash the freedom of others.

In the end, I fear there is a train wreck in the making with secular government protecting anybody's views. Some views must be challenged especially if they hurt people or cause widespread suffering. Secular government should not protect religious concepts from question. It should "promote the general welfare" and not deny any person the necessities of life on any conceptual basis...ie. atheism, Judaism, Christianity, etc. etc. When a person attempts to enforce "god's" will on persons who do not believe in god, they withdraw supports such as the ability to make a living. We see this all over our country, but especially in middle America. The problem is that the doctrines of these religions have a long history of enforcing themselves in non-secular nations of the world. It is inevitable that these concepts are carried to new countries as these people immigrate into mixed culture nations. Even in a democratic system their vote represents their religious ideology and attempts to enforce "god's will." I believe secular government has to make demands on sectarian religions that they not attempt to reify and legislate their religion into law and that they do not in their private life oppress those who do not accept their god. That is a big bill to fill.

We can only protect people, not their religions. especially when religions assert something to the effect their God is KING OF HEAVEN AND EARTH and that humans owe their god loyalty and obedience. We have observed however that as time passes, these religions are all in a state of flux anyway and many have something they call the "reformed" wing that asserts more human rights than their fundamental or orthodox wing. The separation of church and state cannot be accomplished without some reforms in religious communities to allow it.

Being an atheist in no way qualifies one to reform a religion. So you can kind of see the train wreck coming in something like the Evangelicals, or the Mormons, or the Jews in Palestine. You are asking the offenders to reform themselves and are prohibited participation in that reform. Many fundies simply cannot accept the diminution of their church's power in the world and don't want watered down milquetoast religion. They are failing to acknowledge the human rights they would need in a majority ruled government that considered them a minority. Train wreck!

Truly secular and honest government would require of religions that they accept a non religious concept like human rights.
Religion greatly affects and dictates to believers how they interact with others both within and without government structures. When you start tinkering with religious dogma, you begin to dilute the power of religious leaders. In our country they are already treated as something special in that they don't pay taxes like others. The problem with religion is that it is authoritarian to its core and because most of it is pure fraud anyway, religious leaders have always taken license to rain down opprobrium on non believers. To them, non believers are either satanic or simply not entirely human. Nonbelievers are the salient exemplars they aim to attack and either destroy (economically or socially) in lieu of them ceding some of their power over their followers.

We know there has to be a way to resolve this at some time if we are ever going to live together in an advanced society with true civil order. I frankly do not have a crystal ball so I do not know where we will be heading in this regard.
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,342
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Philos, don't you know by now how much conflict and contradiction can exist in one human mind? We are adepts at walking a tightrope of reason and irrationality. It's one of our most brilliant talents. We're only as rational as needed for the task at hand. Suffering and curiosity force us to question things from time to time. If believers are doing fine in their ideological circle of wagons, there is nothing to even cause them to notice, much less challenge, the contradictions in their heads.

It's funny just how much incoherence and confusion can be accepted by a mind that wants certainty, while a mind that accepts ambiguity and uncertainty has a chance of finding some level of clarity and resolution.

This applies to all of us to some degree. Religious belief systems are just super extra good at creating psychological conflict.
 

Underseer

Contributor
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
11,413
Location
Chicago suburbs
Basic Beliefs
atheism, resistentialism
They read Gen. 7 & Exod. 12 & Num. 16 and STILL talk about a god of love. So forget them. There's no bridging the gulf between Christian theology and logic. Never. No how.

It's not that hard to follow:

  1. God is the source of all things that are good.
  2. Freedom is good

Therefore, combining 1 and 2, freedom must come from god. QEDuh.

I didn't say it made sense, I just said it's easy to understand.
 

Philos

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2004
Messages
1,451
Location
UK South West
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Philos, don't you know by now how much conflict and contradiction can exist in one human mind? We are adepts at walking a tightrope of reason and irrationality. It's one of our most brilliant talents. We're only as rational as needed for the task at hand. Suffering and curiosity force us to question things from time to time. If believers are doing fine in their ideological circle of wagons, there is nothing to even cause them to notice, much less challenge, the contradictions in their heads.

It's funny just how much incoherence and confusion can be accepted by a mind that wants certainty, while a mind that accepts ambiguity and uncertainty has a chance of finding some level of clarity and resolution.

This applies to all of us to some degree. Religious belief systems are just super extra good at creating psychological conflict.

Hi Hy,

I've been working with ambiguity and uncertainty for the longest time. As you rightly say, it is a way towards clarity and resolution. In my own words there is a kind of acceptance available to us. I think of it as 'Whatever turns out to be the road, I will accept. I will accept it because it is the road.'

Something like that. :)

Alex.
 

DBT

Contributor
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
13,262
Location
ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
God and freedom?

As for the Bible God; ''Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven'' implies that the Will of God takes precedence on Earth (or shall to be in the 'Kingdom to come'') as it is in Heaven, implying that personal freedom has no place under the rule of God, and that the Will of God is Paramount.
 

Eric H

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2003
Messages
113
Location
UK
Basic Beliefs
CAtholic
Philos;

Let us compare this to dissent in other unhappy situations, such as imprisonment in nasty political systems. In these cases we are still free, despite dreadful hardships, to retain our own moral compass. There are many examples, but one is the case of Nelson Mandela on Robben island. Such cases show that it is possible in these earthly sufferings to retain the spark of freedom within ourselves.

Nelson Mandela was a truly remarkable man, with his freedom came the power to seek vengeance on those who had imprisoned him. But he seemed to show a greater side of forgiveness and mercy, I can't imagine too many people choosing his path.

Having said that, compassion, forgiveness and mercy are at the heart of the Gospel message, the greatest commandments are to love God and to love our neighbour. These commandments are not oppressive.
 

DBT

Contributor
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
13,262
Location
ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
Having said that, compassion, forgiveness and mercy are at the heart of the Gospel message, the greatest commandments are to love God and to love our neighbour. These commandments are not oppressive.

In part. But then there is the other side of the Gospel....the parts that condemn without forgiveness or mercy....
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,342
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Philos;

Let us compare this to dissent in other unhappy situations, such as imprisonment in nasty political systems. In these cases we are still free, despite dreadful hardships, to retain our own moral compass. There are many examples, but one is the case of Nelson Mandela on Robben island. Such cases show that it is possible in these earthly sufferings to retain the spark of freedom within ourselves.

Nelson Mandela was a truly remarkable man, with his freedom came the power to seek vengeance on those who had imprisoned him. But he seemed to show a greater side of forgiveness and mercy, I can't imagine too many people choosing his path.

Having said that, compassion, forgiveness and mercy are at the heart of the Gospel message, the greatest commandments are to love God and to love our neighbour. These commandments are not oppressive.
There is nothing compassionate, forgiving, or merciful in Might is Right. Nothing. You can spout all the nice words you want and it won't change the inhumanity of your religion.
 

Tom Sawyer

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 25, 2002
Messages
17,030
Location
Toronto
Basic Beliefs
That I'm God
Philos;

Let us compare this to dissent in other unhappy situations, such as imprisonment in nasty political systems. In these cases we are still free, despite dreadful hardships, to retain our own moral compass. There are many examples, but one is the case of Nelson Mandela on Robben island. Such cases show that it is possible in these earthly sufferings to retain the spark of freedom within ourselves.

Nelson Mandela was a truly remarkable man, with his freedom came the power to seek vengeance on those who had imprisoned him. But he seemed to show a greater side of forgiveness and mercy, I can't imagine too many people choosing his path.

Having said that, compassion, forgiveness and mercy are at the heart of the Gospel message, the greatest commandments are to love God and to love our neighbour. These commandments are not oppressive.

But there's all that other shit which is really oppressive. You can't just focus on the good stuff and ignore that and then pretend that you're giving an accurate picture of your religion.

It's like this one guy I used to work with who went to the casino each weekend. Every now and again, he'd come back happy and talk about all the money he'd won. I asked him once on one of those days how much he'd lost in the previous few weeks and his answer was "Oh, I don't think about it that way". This is because he was losing a lot of money overall at the casino. His happiness over the win didn't give an accurate picture of how gambling was working out for him.

It is true that there are some non-oppressive aspects of Christian philosophy. Focusing on those, however, does not tell one about Christianity.
 

Rhea

Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
13,351
Location
Recluse
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Having said that, compassion, forgiveness and mercy are at the heart of the Gospel message, the greatest commandments are to love God and to love our neighbour. These commandments are not oppressive.

How do you manage to have this idea of the bible and still carry around a book that contains all those other atrocities? How can the gospels (if this is all you think is in them) exist in the same binding as Judges and not spontaneously combust or cause you brain to implode.

How can a person who claims to only believe the rainbows and unicorns part of the bible EVEN STAND to not rip out the pages that command parents to murder their children for disobedience?

I'm serious about this question. How can you stand to not rip out those pages?
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,342
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
the greatest commandments are to love God and to love our neighbour. These commandments are not oppressive.
But if you don't obey them, you burn in Hell for Eternity.
How can that not be oppressive?
How can they even be commands in the first place? Because whoever wrote this claptrap didn't have a clue about how human beings work beyond a crude reward/punishment mentality. At best, you can command people to act outwardly in a way that indicates love as dictated by the person's social norms. No one can dictate what a person actually experiences emotionally. Suggesting a loving attitude toward others might be effective for some, but commanding it is just ignorant.

But what else would you expect from a might-is-right belief system masquerading as compassionate?
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,725
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
the greatest commandments are to love God and to love our neighbour. These commandments are not oppressive.
But if you don't obey them, you burn in Hell for Eternity.
How can that not be oppressive?
How can they even be commands in the first place? Because whoever wrote this claptrap didn't have a clue about how human beings work beyond a crude reward/punishment mentality. At best, you can command people to act outwardly in a way that indicates love as dictated by the person's social norms. No one can dictate what a person actually experiences emotionally. Suggesting a loving attitude toward others might be effective for some, but commanding it is just ignorant.

But what else would you expect from a might-is-right belief system masquerading as compassionate?

Mafiosi demand 'respect' in exactly the same way; Apparently God is satisfied with scaring people into claiming to love him.

Hey, that God is a great guy! He looks after my home and my business, makes sure nothing 'accidentally' happens to them, know what I'm sayin'? I mean, that's a pretty inflammable looking house right there. Be a shame if it was hit by lightnin' or somthin'. All I gotta do is give him his ten percent, and make sure to go to his place on the weekend, tell him what a great guy he is.
 

Eric H

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2003
Messages
113
Location
UK
Basic Beliefs
CAtholic
the greatest commandments are to love God and to love our neighbour. These commandments are not oppressive.
But if you don't obey them, you burn in Hell for Eternity.
How can that not be oppressive?

But why wouldn't you love your neighbour as you love yourself?

I believe the world is in the mess it is, because we choose to disobey these commandments.
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
But why wouldn't you love your neighbour as you love yourself?
That's not the point, Eric. There's no forgiveness or mercy in eternal damnation, is there?
There's no chance for redemption.
If you regret and truly repent your sins once you're in the lake of fire, you're still fucked.

I believe the world is in the mess it is, because we choose to disobey these commandments.
So...it's okay if we burn in Hell because it's our fault?
Still not a lot of compassion, forgiveness or mercy, Eric.

A lot of petty revenge. meaningless punishment. Torture with no goal.

No mercy...
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,725
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
adding 'ments' to the end does not alter the fact that:

a) One is being commanded to do something; and
b) That command is not possible to obey

If God commands me not to be scared of spiders, on pain of eternal torture, then he is being a dick.

I can pretend not to be scared of spiders. But God knows that I am scared of spiders, and He knows that I am just pretending not to be, and He knows that that is not possible for me to choose not to be scared of spiders.

Equally, I can pretend to love my neighbour as myself. But God knows that I don't love my neighbour, and He knows that I am just pretending to, and He knows that that is not possible for me to choose to love my neighbour.

Somebody who loves spiders, and has pet tarantulas, can look at my fear and gloat, and say 'I believe that your troubles are all down to your arachnophobia'; but that doesn't make the command to not be scared reasonable.

Perhaps you really do love your neighbour as yourself. But if so, you didn't make a conscious choice to do so - love simply doesn't work like that.

Commanding people to do the impossible, with severe punishments for those who fail to obey, is a characteristic of dictatorships. When everyone is guilty of something, the regime can arrest anyone on a whim, and the leader has absolute power. Does the phrase 'we are all sinners' sound familiar?
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,342
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
But why wouldn't you love your neighbour as you love yourself?
You ask that as if you understand that ordinary humanness often drives love and desire for loving relationships. Do you realize that this suggests an admission that god-beliefs are irrelevant?

I believe the world is in the mess it is, because we choose to disobey these commandments.
Well, you believe wrong. Our world is a mess because of our ordinary human confusions and misbeliefs about ourselves and the world around us. Beliefs like yours add to the confusion and divisiveness.

If God commands me not to be scared of spiders, on pain of eternal torture, then he is being a dick.
An irrational psychopathic dick.

Commanding people to do the impossible, with severe punishments for those who fail to obey, is a characteristic of dictatorships. When everyone is guilty of something, the regime can arrest anyone on a whim, and the leader has absolute power. Does the phrase 'we are all sinners' sound familiar?
This poem seems apropos of the dichotomous delusion of Christian beliefs:
http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/fascism-i-sometimes-fear.html
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
If God commands me not to be scared of spiders, on pain of eternal torture, then he is being a dick.
Esp. as God could conceivably have MADE you (and all of us) not be afraid of spiders (assuming that it's a sin worthy of eternal damnation to be afraid of spiders), or he could have not made weird goddamned creatures with all too many legs, way too many eyes, no heads, and able to be ANYWHERE in a fucking room, including dangling down from the ceiling in the exact middle so you can't even try to avoid them as 'god's own creatures' by staying away from the walls and the furniture, no, you think you're safe and WHISST! There's something brushing your face and it's got a spider...at one end or the other... Somewhere. Probably touching you, or being swung about at the end of the webbing while you scream and wave your hand and fling the damned thing ANYWHERE and then your spouse shouts 'Don't hurt it! It eats moths!' because she's a knitter and between the tubs of yarn and the closets of finished and unfinished products she would rather pet a fucking tarantula than let one miserable moth loose in the house so suddenly you have to put the cricket bat down or YOU'RE the bad guy for wanting to shout 'Hulk Smash Alien Monster!' and then...

Ahem. Um. Yeah. Well, i seem to have strayed a bit from my thesis. But, yeah, God's commandments don't really teach us how to be lovable or how to find something lovable in everyone around us, so it's rather oppressive.
And, Eric, you can SAY you love your neighbor, but you do not approach evolutionary researchers with any sort of emotional generosity, do you? You're sure that everyone who invented the Theory of Evolution is out to get you and your religion, and you use this invented bias on their part to judge their efforts to find and spread the truth as they know it.

Which is not a loving thing to do with people you've never met, who have not said they want to do away with your personal faith.
 

Perspicuo

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
1,289
Location
Costa Rica
Basic Beliefs
Empiricist, ergo agnostic
Punishment in a limited and proportionate fashion is a sort of education. Eternal damnation has no purpose for the good of anyone, and therefore cannot be anything other than sadism.

That's why I like the Buddhist POV in these matters (which antecedes both Christianity and Judaism), which is everyone will get saved in the end and that any hell there may be is created by yourself and is only temporary. Karma is, therefore, educative... if it weren't for the absurdity that 99.999% people don't preserve the memories of their past lives and those who supposedly do, not to any significant amount. In any case, that is an absurdity in the explanation but not a crass contradiction in ethic as it is in major Abrahamic religions.

Anyway, hell is crazy. Crazy fiction among fictions.
 

Tigers!

Veteran Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
3,067
Location
On the wing waiting for a kick.
Basic Beliefs
Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
Folks,

The cost is ‘hell’. Now, there is much interpretation and logic chopping about the nature of hell, but one thing we can be sure of, it is a punishment vastly exceeding any earthly sufferings and from which there is no appeal. Can there be dissenters in hell?
Everyone is hell is a dissenter.
Is there a way out for those who honestly reject the ‘love’ of a jealous God?
If you mean out of hell - very sadly no.
 

dockeen

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
489
Location
Florida Panhandle, USA
Basic Beliefs
Ex-Tian, now a general seeker
Note that Tigers! has no problem worshiping a god who tortures others infinitely, as long as he is on the honored guest list. This sort of selfish, amoral perspective led me to coin the term 'whoreshiper', and if this is the sort of follower this god seeks, and will infinitely torture the rest, then count me in the dissent category.
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,342
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Note that Tigers! has no problem worshiping a god who tortures others infinitely, as long as he is on the honored guest list. This sort of selfish, amoral perspective led me to coin the term 'whoreshiper', and if this is the sort of follower this god seeks, and will infinitely torture the rest, then count me in the dissent category.
I agree. I have no problem with my supposedly God-given choice to not whoreship a crazy bully.
 

rousseau

Contributor
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
12,330
Well, if we ignore how stupid Christianity is, believers who have been forgiven of all of their sins at time of death get to spend all eternity in paradise, so even if they aren't free, being subject to the whims of a maniacal, ego-tripping God isn't so bad given the prospect of heaven.

But then, according to the Christian history I'm reading back around 200-400 A.D. Christian leaders couldn't even agree on whether religious leaders should have the ability to forgive sin. Eventually they decided that it would lend itself to the power of the church if they could, and so the ability of Christians to be 'forgiven' of sin is a political ploy that has nothing to do with Jesus or any of his teachings. Taking that a step further, in all actuality this would mean that if you commit sin even once throughout your entire lifetime you will be condemned to hell .. a pretty hard task for a mortal being.

Not sure where I was going with that, but I agree that Christianity as a socio-political system doesn't lend itself to human freedom, if in fantasy land if it were true the lack of freedom would be worth it, though.
 

Tigers!

Veteran Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
3,067
Location
On the wing waiting for a kick.
Basic Beliefs
Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
Note that Tigers! has no problem worshiping a god who tortures others infinitely, as long as he is on the honored guest list.
Like you I have a choice as to whether I am on the guest list or not.

This sort of selfish, amoral perspective led me to coin the term 'whoreshiper', and if this is the sort of follower this god seeks, and will infinitely torture the rest, then count me in the dissent category.
I'm glad you acknowledge the freedom God has given you.

Shame you have no love or regard for those who disagree with yourself.
 

DBT

Contributor
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
13,262
Location
ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
Consequences are always based on a given set of principles. In the case of God and the issue tolerance, assuming the existence of God, it is God that shapes and forms the set of principles that determines the consequences of dissent. Consequently, it is God who demands obedience by imposing harsh consequences.
 

Tigers!

Veteran Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
3,067
Location
On the wing waiting for a kick.
Basic Beliefs
Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
Consequences are always based on a given set of principles. In the case of God and the issue tolerance, assuming the existence of God, it is God that shapes and forms the set of principles that determines the consequences of dissent. Consequently, it is God who demands obedience by imposing harsh consequences.

Disobedience always has harsh consequences.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,725
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Consequences are always based on a given set of principles. In the case of God and the issue tolerance, assuming the existence of God, it is God that shapes and forms the set of principles that determines the consequences of dissent. Consequently, it is God who demands obedience by imposing harsh consequences.

Disobedience always has harsh consequences.

Only if the disobedient lose; or if their cause is unjust.

History is replete with examples of disobedience that have consequences beneficial to the disobedient; and in some cases, are even beneficial to those who are disobeyed.

The US war of independence springs to mind; as do the early struggles of trades unionists worldwide, and any number of smaller and more mundane struggles for freedom, right down to the myriad abuse victims who finally rebel against the authority of their tormentors.

In fact, the statement "Disobedience always has harsh consequences" is characteristic of totalitarian dictatorships. It was likely a good bit of social control propaganda in the period prior to the inception of governments not based on absolute monarchy. But today it sounds pretty ugly.

Of course, we should expect no less from religions founded in the era of divine right of kings.
 

braces_for_impact

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
3,398
Location
Clearwater, FL.
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
So many times I hear from the Christian right about how the founding of America is rooted in biblical principles. I keep asking myself, are these people reading the same bible I am? There's nothing in there about justice, equal representation, democracy, or human or equal rights. There is only what you would expect from such an antique document. The divine right of kings to rule. Hello? *knock knock* is there anyone in there?
 

GenesisNemesis

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
3,796
Location
California
Basic Beliefs
Secular Humanist, Scientific Skepticism, Strong Atheism
You mean "thou shalt worship no other gods before me" isn't open and democratic?
 

dockeen

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
489
Location
Florida Panhandle, USA
Basic Beliefs
Ex-Tian, now a general seeker
Yep, like love me or I will fry you forever.

Look at the horrendous consequences, that come about, all because this insecure god wanted whoreshipers to sing his praises for eternity.
 

Tigers!

Veteran Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
3,067
Location
On the wing waiting for a kick.
Basic Beliefs
Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
So many times I hear from the Christian right about how the founding of America is rooted in biblical principles. I keep asking myself, are these people reading the same bible I am? There's nothing in there about justice, equal representation, democracy, or human or equal rights. There is only what you would expect from such an antique document. The divine right of kings to rule. Hello? *knock knock* is there anyone in there?

Equal rights
Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

We all have the same status before God. Originally made in his image.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,725
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
So many times I hear from the Christian right about how the founding of America is rooted in biblical principles. I keep asking myself, are these people reading the same bible I am? There's nothing in there about justice, equal representation, democracy, or human or equal rights. There is only what you would expect from such an antique document. The divine right of kings to rule. Hello? *knock knock* is there anyone in there?

Equal rights
Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

We all have the same status before God. Originally made in his image.

An argument that relies entirely on the acceptance of your argument by your audience for its persuasiveness is no argument at all.

Can you provide one single shred of evidence that does not depend on our already believing for its effectiveness?

Galatians, like the rest of the Bible, is fiction. Gods are made in the image of their believers, not the other way about; we can see this clearly by the diversity of religious belief - even within one single congregation, in one single denomination, within the wider umbrella of a single religion, there are disagreements as to the details of what God is, what He wants, and what degree of autonomy we have in doing His bidding.

This is what would be expected if Gods are the creations of men; but if men were all created with the same status before a single creator God, we would expect to see little or no diversity of religious belief - if it is possible to 'know God', then we all would.
 

GenesisNemesis

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
3,796
Location
California
Basic Beliefs
Secular Humanist, Scientific Skepticism, Strong Atheism
Ahem...

Ephesians 6:5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ."

I think this is one of those contradiction thingies.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom