There is no benevolent god...

[skepticalbip]

Fear and/or awe of these invented gods also inspire worship. Worship doesn't just mean, "oh, everything thy doest is perfect", worship can also mean, "damned you scare the shit out of me with your omnipotence and random nonsensical actions".

The question still stands though. I mean, when we see a woman get beaten by her husband on a regular basis, do we not ask her "why the fuck do you stay with that bastard?"

Just because there's a psychological reason she stays with him doesn't mean it's a *good* reason.

It's the same with god. If god is an evil bastard who can smite us whenever he wants then maybe some people are scared by that into worshipping him... but while I understand that the fear motivates them, it isn't the correct response.

You seem to be making an argument that worship of some invented and imaginary "good" god is the correct response. I would disagree. Worship of any god isn't the correct response. The fact is that most gods are worshiped out of fear, the Christian god out of fear of burning in eternal hellfire. The gentile side of the Abrahamic god was a latter add-on to the original destructive, vengeful, demanding, genocidal god of the old testament, still present in the Christian god in addition to the "gentle" side.

ETA:
To get back to the OP, the reason not to worship a god is because there isn't one, not because the ascribed "good" qualities can't be logically defended.

 

[credoconsolans]

It depends on what the god is capable of.

If she's say, a powerful god who is in charge of fertility of plants, it would behoove people dependent on successful agriculture to worship and honor such a goddess, even if she doesn't seem particularly friendly. And why? Because if momma ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Agricultural_gods. In this article we are directed to 73. Prior probability of 1/73. Is that enough?

The Romans handled this problem easily. "Great Liber...or by whatever name you call yourself..."

 

[dystopian]

You seem to be making an argument that worship of some invented and imaginary "good" god is the correct response.

No, I'm obviously not making that argument.

However, at least if one believes there to be a god and that god can be demonstrated to be actually good in any way meaningful to humans, then ignoring things like whether or not the god can't be proven to exist, it makes sense to worship that god. If one however knows that said god is evil, then the correct response would be to oppose that god. One could make the argument that one should follow that god's rules and give it false praise to suit its ego, but that isn't worship as you wouldn't be genuinely honoring or revering the god (which is the definition of worship), and it isn't generally what theists do in any case.

 

[OLDMAN]

God is three separate gods, and yet one inclusive deity. What could this possibly mean? It seems to me that since there are three elements to God then perhaps each element contains only one omnipotent power. God is the creator (the father) who has unlimited powers. Christ is the savior who is love. The Holy Spirit is all knowing. But clearly all do not posses all three omni-powers. The creator couldn't have know flooding the earth, wouldn't rid it of evil or he wouldn't have bothered. It is also clear that Jesus was separate from the Creator, because he had to pray to him to receive answers. He also questioned God's plans for him and his sacrifice, so he wasn't all knowing either. The Holly Spirit may be the only bind that ties them together and is the most mysterious of all the powers. While it can apparently count hairs on a head or all the sparrows that live and die, it contains no physical powers. Yet it is the Holly Spirit that humans sense and allows them to change into spirits at the moment of death. You and I have no sense of the spirit and cannot enter into heaven. After all, how could you see a ghost if you don't believe in them?

Now, the argument that Jesus told slave to obey their masters is somehow evil or not very loving...
This is really good advice, given what would befall slaves who did not obey. His words were meant to change the hearts of slave-owners. And if followed, accomplish just that end. His only anger is directed towards a fig tree and some money-lender tables. Odd, but not unloving.

 

[dystopian]

God is three separate gods, and yet one inclusive deity. What could this possibly mean? It seems to me that since there are three elements to God then perhaps each element contains only one omnipotent power. God is the creator (the father) who has unlimited powers. Christ is the savior who is love. The Holy Spirit is all knowing. But clearly all do not posses all three omni-powers. The creator couldn't have know flooding the earth, wouldn't rid it of evil or he wouldn't have bothered. It is also clear that Jesus was separate from the Creator, because he had to pray to him to receive answers. He also questioned God's plans for him and his sacrifice, so he wasn't all knowing either. The Holly Spirit may be the only bind that ties them together and is the most mysterious of all the powers. While it can apparently count hairs on a head or all the sparrows that live and die, it contains no physical powers. Yet it is the Holly Spirit that humans sense and allows them to change into spirits at the moment of death. You and I have no sense of the spirit and cannot enter into heaven.

This is just another cop-out. But I suppose we can add another line to the OP:

"If the only way you you can reconcile your belief in a god with the reality of evil's existence is by arguing that he has multiple personality disorder... maybe he isn't worth believing in."

After all, how could you see a ghost if you don't believe in them?

The ability to see things that are real is independent of whether or not one believes in those things. It doesn't matter if you don't believe in airplanes... you will still see the boeing 747 when it flies over your head. The thing about reality is that its observation does not rely on belief. If the only people who can see something are the people who believe in it to begin with, then it probably doesn't exist.

 

[skepticalbip]

You seem to be making an argument that worship of some invented and imaginary "good" god is the correct response.

No, I'm obviously not making that argument.

However, at least if one believes there to be a god and that god can be demonstrated to be actually good in any way meaningful to humans, then ignoring things like whether or not the god can't be proven to exist, it makes sense to worship that god. If one however knows that said god is evil, then the correct response would be to oppose that god. One could make the argument that one should follow that god's rules and give it false praise to suit its ego, but that isn't worship as you wouldn't be genuinely honoring or revering the god (which is the definition of worship), and it isn't generally what theists do in any case.

But fear is the ultimate reason given by Christians for their worship. It is also the reason they use in trying to gain converts. The old standby - if you don't accept, obey, and worship our god then you will be condemned to eternal hellfire.

 

[dystopian]

But that is the ultimate reason given by Christians for their worship. It is also the reason they use in trying to gain converts. The old standby - if you don't accept, obey, and worship our god then you will be condemned to eternal hellfire.

Is it? Very few if any Christians that I am aware of give that as their reason; ultimate or otherwise. If you ask them why they worship, they will without fail throw you a bunch of lines about how awesome god is. None of them will start by telling you it's because they're afraid of god and very few if any would admit to that at any point. It's really only when they want to convince us stubborn atheists and their 'god is awesome' rhetoric fails that they pull out the 'but god will send you to hell if you don't believe!' crap. That does not imply to me that the reason (ultimate or otherwise) for worship as they see it is fear. The 'fear of god' thing is something that applies to the rest of us, not the people who are 'saved'. Of course, you and I can recognize that that's rationalizing on their part... but we're talking about their reasons for belief as it exist within *their* system and experience, not as those with a more objective understanding might see it.

 

[skepticalbip]

But that is the ultimate reason given by Christians for their worship. It is also the reason they use in trying to gain converts. The old standby - if you don't accept, obey, and worship our god then you will be condemned to eternal hellfire.

Is it? Very few if any Christians that I am aware of give that as their reason; ultimate or otherwise. If you ask them why they worship, they will without fail throw you a bunch of lines about how awesome god is. None of them will start by telling you it's because they're afraid of god and very few if any would admit to that at any point. It's really only when they want to convince us stubborn atheists and their 'god is awesome' rhetoric fails that they pull out the 'but god will send you to hell if you don't believe!' crap. That does not imply to me that the reason (ultimate or otherwise) for worship as they see it is fear. The 'fear of god' thing is something that applies to the rest of us, not the people who are 'saved'. Of course, you and I can recognize that that's rationalizing on their part... but we're talking about their reasons for belief as it exist within *their* system and experience, not as those with a more objective understanding might see it.

Maybe I talk to different Christians than you do. I have yet run into one (that I can recall) who does not mention avoiding hell as the reason for obeying god in any conversation of any length.

ETA:
In your next conversation with a Christian, ask them why we should obey god's commandments. My bet is that most will not say "because it is right" but will mention god's punishment of hell if we don't.

 

[skepticalbip]

God is three separate gods, and yet one inclusive deity. What could this possibly mean? It seems to me that since there are three elements to God then perhaps each element contains only one omnipotent power. God is the creator (the father) who has unlimited powers. Christ is the savior who is love. The Holy Spirit is all knowing. But clearly all do not posses all three omni-powers. The creator couldn't have know flooding the earth, wouldn't rid it of evil or he wouldn't have bothered. It is also clear that Jesus was separate from the Creator, because he had to pray to him to receive answers. He also questioned God's plans for him and his sacrifice, so he wasn't all knowing either. The Holly Spirit may be the only bind that ties them together and is the most mysterious of all the powers. While it can apparently count hairs on a head or all the sparrows that live and die, it contains no physical powers. Yet it is the Holly Spirit that humans sense and allows them to change into spirits at the moment of death.

I gotta say, that is the most reasonable interpretation of the trinity concept I have seen. The church should adopt it to explain all the fuckups obvious in Biblical history and in daily life that a unified omni-everything godhead they present as truth doesn't.

Way back, when I was searching, my questions about the concept of the trinity was "explained" as a "mystery". No shit! That is why I was asking and trying to understand, it was a mystery to me. "Mystery" to the current church is an answer?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

If the Trinity is three separate guys with different powers, can they still Voltron together if Lucifer decides to attack the planet or something?

 

[skepticalbip]

If the Trinity is three separate guys with different powers, can they still Voltron together if Lucifer decides to attack the planet or something?

It would seem to make battling Satan a bit of a problem. The Holy Ghost would obviously take the role of commander in chief since he is the only one with any knowledge so he would remain in his big office directing and not actually engaged in the fighting. God the father is the only one with smiting power so he would be the one actually involved in the combat. Meanwhile, Jesus as the love god would be carrying protest signs saying, "Stop the War".

 

[Atheos]

God is three separate gods, and yet one inclusive deity. What could this possibly mean? It seems to me that since there are three elements to God then perhaps each element contains only one omnipotent power. God is the creator (the father) who has unlimited powers. Christ is the savior who is love. The Holy Spirit is all knowing. But clearly all do not posses all three omni-powers. The creator couldn't have know flooding the earth, wouldn't rid it of evil or he wouldn't have bothered. It is also clear that Jesus was separate from the Creator, because he had to pray to him to receive answers. He also questioned God's plans for him and his sacrifice, so he wasn't all knowing either. The Holly Spirit may be the only bind that ties them together and is the most mysterious of all the powers. While it can apparently count hairs on a head or all the sparrows that live and die, it contains no physical powers. Yet it is the Holly Spirit that humans sense and allows them to change into spirits at the moment of death. You and I have no sense of the spirit and cannot enter into heaven. After all, how could you see a ghost if you don't believe in them?

Now, the argument that Jesus told slave to obey their masters is somehow evil or not very loving...
This is really good advice, given what would befall slaves who did not obey. His words were meant to change the hearts of slave-owners. And if followed, accomplish just that end. His only anger is directed towards a fig tree and some money-lender tables. Odd, but not unloving.

This is certainly a nice summary but it doesn't deal with the question of how these three separate gods can be one inclusive deity unless you're suggesting that they simply sit at a table and govern by consensus. Even that would be trumped by the spook's omniscience, since he would ostensibly know what the other two were thinking (assuming they were capable of thought). After all, if one theorizes that the spook has no physical powers why theorize that the other two have mental powers? Why theorize the creator dude has a plan? Why wouldn't Junior pray to the spook instead of pop if he wanted answers since that's where all the answers are anyway? Why would Junior say pop is the only one who knows "when that day" will be if it's really the spook who knows that answer. So many questions, so many reasons this self-contradictory doctrine will never be reconcilable until they start over from scratch.

 

[dystopian]

Maybe I talk to different Christians than you do. I have yet run into one (that I can recall) who does not mention avoiding hell as the reason for obeying god in any conversation of any length.

In my experience (and I suspect yours as well, if you were to dissect those conversations), they only mention that as a way of either trying to convince *you* of what they're saying, or themselves if they're experiencing doubt. It never seems to be the reason that a convinced Christian has for themselves, as to why to worship. Indeed, that would make no sense in relation to the belief itself. God is "good" after all. God is "great". God is the creator and all that jazz. The supreme being! In the face of that, you really don't need to be afraid to worship. Why WOULDN'T you worship the supreme being of the universe? It's only when you start doubting that god is real, that the idea of being punished for not believing in him becomes relevant. After all, so long as you don't have doubt and are a proper worshipping christian, why would you ever need to think about hell at all? It doesn't concern you.

ETA:
In your next conversation with a Christian,

Yeah, that's not going to happen anytime soon. I have the good fortune of living in the most secular countries in the world, in one of the most secular regions within said country, and it just so happens that in this culture people tend to keep their religious views (if any) to themselves.

Still, I think the same argument applies there as the one I made above. They're say those things either because they're experiencing doubt themselves, or because they want to give you some "compelling" reason to join their side. But if they are true believers, with nothing in the way of doubt, it makes little sense to me that someone would justify that belief by appeal to hell.

 

[skepticalbip]

In my experience (and I suspect yours as well, if you were to dissect those conversations), they only mention that as a way of either trying to convince *you* of what they're saying, or themselves if they're experiencing doubt. It never seems to be the reason that a convinced Christian has for themselves, as to why to worship. Indeed, that would make no sense in relation to the belief itself. God is "good" after all. God is "great". God is the creator and all that jazz. The supreme being! In the face of that, you really don't need to be afraid to worship. Why WOULDN'T you worship the supreme being of the universe? It's only when you start doubting that god is real, that the idea of being punished for not believing in him becomes relevant. After all, so long as you don't have doubt and are a proper worshipping christian, why would you ever need to think about hell at all? It doesn't concern you.

Christians may not want to admit now that they are driven by fear of damnation. They, however, until recently (within my lifetime) described themselves as "God fearing people" rather than "religious people".

ETA:
In your next conversation with a Christian,

Yeah, that's not going to happen anytime soon. I have the good fortune of living in the most secular countries in the world, in one of the most secular regions within said country, and it just so happens that in this culture people tend to keep their religious views (if any) to themselves.

Still, I think the same argument applies there as the one I made above. They're say those things either because they're experiencing doubt themselves, or because they want to give you some "compelling" reason to join their side. But if they are true believers, with nothing in the way of doubt, it makes little sense to me that someone would justify that belief by appeal to hell.

Then it seems that you don't really have much experience on which to base your beliefs about Christians' thinking and motivations. I interact with Christians daily. The subject of religion does not always come up but often enough to be beyond interesting into being fairly irritating.

ETA:
I thought you may find this informative about Christian thought. It is a Christian Bible studies website:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/biblestudies/bible-answers/spirituallife/what-does-it-mean-to-fear-god.html

What does it mean to fear God?

.....
Scripture is full of examples of how fearing God is a positive rather than a negative thing. For example in Genesis 42:18, Joseph wins his brothers' trust when he declares he is a God-fearing man. It was because the midwives feared God that they obeyed him instead of the authorities by sparing the Hebrew babies (Exodus 1:17). Pharaoh brought disaster on his nation because he did not fear God (Exodus 9:29-31). Moses chose leaders to help him on the basis that they feared God and wouldn't take bribes (Exodus 18:21) and told the Hebrews that God met with them in a terrifying display of his power so that they wouldn't sin (Exodus 20:20). The Mosaic Law cites fear of God as a reason to treat the disabled and elderly well (Leviticus 19:14, 32). And lest you think this is only an Old Testament idea, note that Jesus states this stronger than anyone when he says, "Don't be afraid of those who want to kill your body; they cannot touch your soul. Fear only God, who can destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matthew 10:28).
.........

 

[George S]

I fear you, o ruler, for the choice is obey or suffer torture.

Obey -- as Eve did not -- or my children are doomed; for ancestors' sins are inherited.

The first command is to obey no other ruler.

(...sounds to me like a Mideast warlord...or a mob boss...)

 

[OLDMAN]

Atheos: This is certainly a nice summary but it doesn't deal with the question of how these three separate gods can be one inclusive deity unless you're suggesting that they simply sit at a table and govern by consensus. Even that would be trumped by the spook's omniscience, since he would ostensibly know what the other two were thinking (assuming they were capable of thought). After all, if one theorizes that the spook has no physical powers why theorize that the other two have mental powers? Why theorize the creator dude has a plan? Why wouldn't Junior pray to the spook instead of pop if he wanted answers since that's where all the answers are anyway? Why would Junior say pop is the only one who knows "when that day" will be if it's really the spook who knows that answer. So many questions, so many reasons this self-contradictory doctrine will never be reconcilable until they start over from scratch.


H20, can be in three separate states, but it cannot be all three at the same time. While water is affected by temperature, God is affected by time or the lack of it. Could be everything happened at the moment of creation, even the end. The Holy Spirit cannot be spoken to, only felt. Science tells us that time: present, past and future are really happening at the same time, it is only your perspective that can change. Everything is happening (our perspective) the way it is going to happen.(God's perspective) There is nothing you can do about it...just accept it. In that you will find the essence of God. (the Holy Spirit) There is no evil, only perspective, there is no time, only perspective, there is only the good that it all happened...even if you end up being someone's supper.

 

[Atheos]

If the spook can't talk it would be impossible to know if it was omnipotent or not, so that's nothing but baseless assertion. If paw is omnipotent nothing would be able to affect him including the lack of time. I agree there's nothing I can do about any of this but there's nothing any of it can do to me either as it is irrelevant drivel. The god you describes is functionally equivalent to complete fiction.

 

[OLDMAN]

If the spook can't talk it would be impossible to know if it was omnipotent or not, so that's nothing but baseless assertion. If paw is omnipotent nothing would be able to affect him including the lack of time. I agree there's nothing I can do about any of this but there's nothing any of it can do to me either as it is irrelevant drivel. The god you describes is functionally equivalent to complete fiction.

But it can, or may, talk to you. If you can only sense the trail it has left during the happening. As we travel thru time, some people sense it some do not. Ask an honest Christian (one who is honest about what it means to pray to God) and they will tell you it is like making a conscious decision, only they feel since they prayed the answer is in God's plans for them. You or I would simply call it a conscious decision. By seeking God and following the residue of the Holly Spirit things align and the path becomes clearer until you know you have found him.

Remember, when Jesus prayed he did not get any answers either. Jesus asked if there was a different way? Could he not stay on earth as ruler and save mankind thru his kingdom on earth. The answer was silence. It was not how thing unfolded during the happening, and so Jesus has no choice but to follow along the path offered. The creator could not change it because it has already ended.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ya, it's weird how silence is so often the answer to prayers and how often the creator can't change anything.

I wonder why that is? It's a mystery, I tells ya.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Ask an honest Christian (one who is honest about what it means to pray to God) and they will tell you it is like making a conscious decision,

By 'honest' what, exactly, do you mean?
I have known a Catholic wizard who sincerely believed that prayer was identical to casting a spell. It's the effort to get magical forces to change reality according to your wishes. Just different words used. Incense instead of eye of newt. Kneeling instead of standing in a circle of protection.



How is this reply less than 'honest?'