God Is A Psychopath

[Lion IRC]

Watching atheists create God in their own preferred image.

TBH, the whole God as murderous freak has been done to death. But the exercise is one in applying the most basic standards of human decency to an entity so many hold up as perfect, which, when done, rapidly demonstrates not only how imperfect this entity is, but how it fails to live up to those most basic standards.

Punishing evil and enforcing justice is a basic moral standard.
People here accusing me of not having read the bible?
Sheesh! There's nothing about God in the Old Testament I wouldn't defend. And as for a 'warm and fuzzy' New Testament God, I think it's the atheists here who seem not to have read it.
There's broods of vipers fleeing from the coming wrath. There's axes hacking at the roots of trees cutting them down so they can be thrown into the fire. There's wailing and gnashing of teeth.

The vast majority of us go about our lives being decent, or at least not doing the wrong thing without much thought.

OK OK
Enough about you. We all want to brag about how good we are.

So why would anyone worship a god that fails so enormously in doing the same? Because this god punishes--forever. And to make matters worse, no one can prove the existence of this (or any other) god, which means we don't find out if it was worth worshipping until it's too late.

You're contradicting your own atheology. You don't need to postpone your decision whether or not to worship God. Look around you and see how many atheists have already decided.

The two rules of atheism.
Rule 1 - there's no God
Rule 2 - if there's a God I hate him

It's not like this particular god has any wisdom not found elsewhere. Go look at the Koran;

I checked the quran.
It's got Moses and Adam and Eve and Jesus and Mary and Jonah and Noah....

see Buddhist or Hindu texts. All the same stuff is in each of them.

So many religions all reporting an afterlife, the soul, Higher Beings, divine enforcement of transcendent moral law.
Hmmm.

There's nothing unique about the god of the Bible.

Sounds like you think all gods are the same. All psychopaths?
That sort of dilutes the point of this thread if there's nothing unique about Jehovah.

The only compelling reason to worship it is out of fear of damnation.

But you said people can do good without needing God or the bible. How then is fear/damnation needed as a reason? Or did you mean atheists are the only people who think it's good to do good for goodness sake?
You seem not to understand that bible-believers like God's laws - we aren't 'yoked' by them. We benefit from them.

In human terms, which is all we have with which to assess things, this god is cruel, abusive, spiteful, contradictory---

Billions of humans don't share your subjective assessment of God. How can that be? <--- rhetorical question

but it does vaguely offer "eternal life." What that means is anyone's guess, but accounts from the Bible seem to indicate a horrifying existence wherein this god is praised 24/7 for all of eternity by those allowed into Heaven. So by human standards, even the reward this thing doles out is repulsive, thereby leaving us two bleak options.

I guess ou're entitled to your opinion of what's "horrifying"

This is not the stuff of a good person, let alone a benevolent supernatural entity.

So many anti-theists (lets be honest - they are anti-Christian) describe the religion they hate in such a way that leads me to agree that, yeah, I would also leave THAT religion.

 

[Copernicus]

I think that the thread title should really be "God is the Frankenstein Monster", which would be a more accurate depiction of the God of the Bible. After all, the Bible is a compilation of very different myths and stories drawn from different points in time. So God's character becomes a patchwork of different ideas that various Abrahamic religious movements distill into an ideal. He can be either an evil, misogynistic, domineering old patriarch or some kind of benevolent, forgiving, protective father figure. He is whatever believers want him to be.

 

[phands]

If only god had been invented this week, possibly in Scandinavia, there'd be no need for threads like this.

Scandinavian gods are cool. Thor and Loke are awesome

AN oldie, but.....

 

[fast]

Since we're proselytizing,

Proselyting? Or reading?

Well, I must admit I put spin on it, as in they're reaching out to convert those that are actually attracted to such horrid depictions.

Of course, except for the seriously self-deluded, most people know full well their interpretations are abominable.

 

[atrib]

Punishing evil and enforcing justice is a basic moral standard.

Your standards for morality and justice are very different from mine. That's because you take your lessons from the barbaric psychopath Biblegod, whereas I am a sane, rational human who believes that punishment should fit the crime, and be meted out with the intent to rehabilitate, not to merely inflict suffering.

I would not curse my children and all their descendants to disease and death for disobeying an instruction; I might send them up to their rooms without TV for a week or more depending on the severity of their infractions.

I would not kill all living things on the planet by engineering a massive flood. Planet wide genocide is a big no-no.

I would not subject my children to random plagues and pestilences.

I would not father a child for the sole purpose of using him as a pointless human sacrificial offering to myself. Human sacrifice is another big no-no for me.

I would not subject all people who do not accept me as their lord and savior to eternal torture. Need I say, another big no-no?

I am not a perfect human being, yet I am miles ahead of your Biblegod when it comes to morality. I do not view people as my personal property, to be treated and disposed of in any barbaric way I please, even if I created them. I think genocide is wrong and immoral, that human sacrifice is wrong and immoral, that eternal torture is wrong and immoral. Your mind is so fucked up with your religious indoctrination that you cannot even see these self evident truths. Shame on you.

 

[atrib]

The two rules of atheism.
Rule 1 - there's no God
Rule 2 - if there's a God I hate him

What Rule 2 should actually say (because we all know how theists love to misrepresent people): I hate what the Biblegod character represents. I also hate how religion fucks up the minds of otherwise normal people (a little genocide once in a while never hurt anyone; or, sure, he's my son, so I can sacrifice him to myself to appease my homicidal psychopathic instincts - look at all the souls I'm saving ).

see Buddhist or Hindu texts. All the same stuff is in each of them.

So many religions all reporting an afterlife, the soul, Higher Beings, divine enforcement of transcendent moral law.
Hmmm.

Hindus and Buddhists don't believe in an afterlife; they believe in Moksha, or release from the cycle of earthly life through good deeds and through enlightenment achieved through the pursuit of knowledge.

Also, the authors of the ancient Hindu scriptures were far more honest and intellectually sophisticated than the barbarians who wrote the Bible. They (Hindu philosophers) speculated that the gods they wrote about might simply be the creation of human minds, and encouraged people to live a good life, treat all living things with compassion, and to seek knowledge. They wanted humans to ask questions and to learn about their faith and reality, not blindly believe and obey a barbaric god just to avoid potential repurcussions (eternal damnation).

In human terms, which is all we have with which to assess things, this god is cruel, abusive, spiteful, contradictory---

Billions of humans don't share your subjective assessment of God. How can that be? <--- rhetorical question

Billions of humans are too stupid and lazy to do think for themselves, which is necessary if you want to break out of the mental enslavement of religions like Christianity. We may wear clothes and groom our bodies, but we still let our primitive reptile brains do the thinking in many situations.

but it does vaguely offer "eternal life." What that means is anyone's guess, but accounts from the Bible seem to indicate a horrifying existence wherein this god is praised 24/7 for all of eternity by those allowed into Heaven. So by human standards, even the reward this thing doles out is repulsive, thereby leaving us two bleak options.

I guess ou're entitled to your opinion of what's "horrifying"

The thought of spending eternity taking turns giving a fuckhead god and his idiot clone blowjobs is repulsive to me personally. But that is subjective; you apparently find the thought to be quite pleasant?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Punishing evil and enforcing justice is a basic moral standard.

Except God enjoys punishing anyone who isn't his "chosen people". There is a difference between enforcing the law, and enjoying punishing people. God has no moral high ground in the Tanakh, he didn't need it... at the time it was written.

 

[bilby]

 

[Lion IRC]

Stealing someone's labor without pay violates one of the Ten Commandments

 

[DBT]

What about killing someone for gathering sticks on a Sabbath?


"While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day...And the Lord said to Moses, 'The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.' And all the congregation brought him outside the camp, and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses." Numbers 15:32

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I do remember a few years ago that Alvin Plantinga and some other Christian philosophers were going to have some meetings to try to figure out how to square the tales of God's massacres, genocides and savage acts with claims of God's mercy and compassion and perfect goodness. I have not heard how they decided to square these discordant claims derived from their beloved Bible.

 

[DrZoidberg]

If only god had been invented this week, possibly in Scandinavia, there'd be no need for threads like this.

Scandinavian gods are cool. Thor and Loke are awesome

Do they habitually commit homicides and genocide and later repent while basking in the aroma of burning flesh? If they don't, they can't possibly be the real deal, because everyone knows that real gods are savage, vengeful, psychopathic, homicidal beasts or else nobody would respect them and follow them.

Pagan gods are anthropomorphised forces of nature. They don't give a fuck about humans. They treat humans like their playthings. Humans might get favours if they give good enough gifts or if they do some great deed for the gods.

The problem with the Abrahamic God is that it started as paganism. Yehova was initially just the god of war and manliness. Over time other aspects were added onto it until it became omnipotent. So the god of war also became the god of cuddles and love. This evolution can be tracked in the Torah. In parts of the Torah God is good. And in other parts God doesn't give a fuck. Very confusing.

But this is only a problem for fundamentalists. More sensible (and normal) Christians don't care about this.

It's always a bit silly when atheists have a go at fundamentalists only, and treat them like every Christian, and go "ha ha". No you didn't. Fundamentalists are retarded. It's mean to pick on the handicapped kid in school for the same reason. Stick to argue against moderate Christians. But that gets harder, because their arguments are often sensible.

 

[DrZoidberg]

If only god had been invented this week, possibly in Scandinavia, there'd be no need for threads like this.

Scandinavian gods are cool. Thor and Loke are awesome

AN oldie, but.....

View attachment 17605

My favourite Norse god is Víðarr. He's the god of vengence, and silence. Why this combination? Because if you're going to take revenge... just do it.. don't talk about it. Only loudmouth pussies do that.

It's even more funny if you know that Vikings thought it was kind of gay to talk at all. A real man kept his mouth shut unless absolutely necessary. Vikings were badass.

 

[Lion IRC]

I do remember a few years ago that Alvin Plantinga and some other Christian philosophers were going to have some meetings to try to figure out how to square the tales of God's massacres, genocides and savage acts with claims of God's mercy and compassion and perfect goodness. I have not heard how they decided to square these discordant claims derived from their beloved Bible.

They aren't "discordant" and they 'squared' them the same way all the great theologians have.
By asking whether the end justified the means. (Surgeons inflicts pain. Are they psychopaths?)

Every intervention by God can be (scripturally) justified in terms of God's desire to remediate and minimise the consequences of evil initiated by those who would seek to disobey God's plan for a peaceful world.

In the bible ALL killing and violence is instigated by humans (and satan) and then God intervenes. Never the other way around.

 

[DBT]

I do remember a few years ago that Alvin Plantinga and some other Christian philosophers were going to have some meetings to try to figure out how to square the tales of God's massacres, genocides and savage acts with claims of God's mercy and compassion and perfect goodness. I have not heard how they decided to square these discordant claims derived from their beloved Bible.

They aren't "discordant" and they 'squared' them the same way all the great theologians have.
By asking whether the end justified the means. (Surgeons inflicts pain. Are they psychopaths?)

Every intervention by God can be (scripturally) justified in terms of God's desire to remediate and minimise the consequences of evil initiated by those who would seek to disobey God's plan for a peaceful world.

In the bible ALL killing and violence is instigated by humans (and satan) and then God intervenes. Never the other way around.

Not so. I gave an example of a killing ordered by God;



"While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day...And the Lord said to Moses, 'The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.' And all the congregation brought him outside the camp, and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses." Numbers 15:32

 

[Lion IRC]

Barack Obama ordered killing (of UBL) and hardly anyone calls Obama a psychopath.

 

[DBT]

Barack Obama ordered killing (of UBL) and hardly anyone calls Obama a psychopath.

What can be said about the moral standard of someone who orders a killing, stoning to death, for the reason of gathering sticks on a Sabbath?

 

[Keith&Co.]

(Surgeons inflicts pain. Are they psychopaths?)

Surgeons are not omnipotent. If they were, and still inflicted pain, then, yes, they'd be psycopaths.
Surgeons are typically not omniscient. If they were, and COULD figure out a painless treatment, but chose to use a chains aw instead, they'd be psychopaths, yes.

Also, surgeons specialize in knowledge. A cardiologist works to save a heart as his focus, not because the Heart is his Chosen Organ. He doesn't cut through the sternum because that bone 'is wicked' or that bone worships false surgeons. He doesn't justify using the rib spreader by blaming the ribs as deserving that treatment.
A surgeon who cuts away part of a lung so that the heart can move into the promised land would be a psychopath...

 

[ruby sparks]

Barack Obama ordered killing (of UBL) and hardly anyone calls Obama a psychopath.

What can be said about the moral standard of someone who orders a killing, stoning to death, for the reason of gathering sticks on a Sabbath?

That gathering sticks on a Sabbath is an evil initiated by those who would seek to disobey God's plan for a peaceful world. Duh.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I do remember a few years ago that Alvin Plantinga and some other Christian philosophers were going to have some meetings to try to figure out how to square the tales of God's massacres, genocides and savage acts with claims of God's mercy and compassion and perfect goodness. I have not heard how they decided to square these discordant claims derived from their beloved Bible.

They aren't "discordant" and they 'squared' them the same way all the great theologians have.
By asking whether the end justified the means. (Surgeons inflicts pain. Are they psychopaths?)

Every intervention by God can be (scripturally) justified in terms of God's desire to remediate and minimise the consequences of evil initiated by those who would seek to disobey God's plan for a peaceful world.

In the bible ALL killing and violence is instigated by humans (and satan) and then God intervenes. Never the other way around.

God rewards Jacob’s trickery and theft. Job did nothing wrong. God hardened the heart of Pharaoh so he would not let the Hebrews leave so that God could continue spanking Egypt.