The God of the gaps

reply to post by randyvs


I'm sorry, but 'we' have chosen nothing. Do you really think that because 2 people supposedly ate from a magic tree 6,000 years ago that our entire species was cursed? Where's the justice in that?

Originally posted by randyvs
Well there's just no damn way you will ever be called or even thought of as a fool by me. Just want to keep that clear as I'm sure you already have some idea of that.

That, randvs, is because you are an awesome dude. One of the few that can maintain respectable discourse. A tip of the hat to you, sir.

Huh! I have to wonder if what I'm seeing thru the course of this thread so far, is'nt just reluctance. But absolute fear? Fear to admit that mankind might be minus his greatest asset, (if he exists of course ) God?

This is the best synopsis of the general state of affairs of humankind today. There is a HUGE fear in a lot of people that we "might be minus [our] greatest asset, God". That there may be no god(s). We may be entirely alone. What lengths some will go to convince themselves and others that it couldn't possibly be so.

I'm sorry, but 'we' have chosen nothing. Do you really think that because 2 people supposedly ate from a magic tree 6,000 years ago that our entire species was cursed? Where's the justice in that?

reply to post by Griffo


Adam did choose for all of us. Adam is mankind. God dosn't play." What's good for the goose is good for the gander", and the whole bit . We messed up with God. Not the other way around. However he has provided.

Wouldn't it be ironic that what we seek is temporarily hidden; within reach all along? The inference would be that having an "Open Mind," closes the "information gap" by a leap-of-faith to where truth is revealed?

Think about it. Necessity is the mother of invention; in order to do this, requires faith, determination, and a certain amount of "spiritual-insight."

Think about it...

Originally posted by trekwebmaster
Think about it. Necessity is the mother of invention; in order to do this, requires faith, determination, and a certain amount of "spiritual-insight."

Think about it...

In order to invent? It does not take faith (belief without evidence) or "spiritual insight" to invent. It takes simply ingenuity and effort (and sometimes necessity).

reply to post by randyvs


So, you believe that God made us, I think it is safe to say.

Do you also believe that God is perfect or infallible?

If so, it would follow that he does not make mistakes.

Therefore, everything about the way we are would be intended by him. Not necessarily our actions, but our strengths and, importantly, our flaws, and in particular for this point, that flaw where any person told not to do something will wonder why and, if why is not answered, find out why by doing it.

If I have accurately represented your beliefs, then God would have made us "Flawed" on purpose, and anything Adam or Eve did "against God's will" would surely actually be fulfillment of his will on confirmation that the flaws he purposefully built into us really did do as they said on the tin.

If he had anyone to be disappointed in when we did what he made us to do, it would surely be himself?


Either God is fallible, in which case who is he to point fingers and tell us to feel badly about our shortcomings, or he meant us to fail, in which case why should we feel bad about our failures anyway?


(EDIT: the point of this post - a biblical God is just as good an argument for immorality as it is for morality. Or at least I think it is. My tea levels are too low to be certain).

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

That, randvs, is because you are an awesome dude. One of the few that can maintain respectable discourse. A tip of the hat to you, sir.

Truly there is no greater compliment, then the one that comes from a nemisis.

reply to post by TheWill


All you could be thought to be saying is freedom of choice is a flaw.

reply to post by randyvs


If god was all knowing/powerful why did he give Adam and Eve free will then? As he knew they would eat from the tree. Or better still, why did he create satan, because if he was all knowing he would have known that satan would trick them from eating from the tree

reply to post by randyvs


No, I am not.

I am saying that a God that makes us susceptible to temptation and then waves temptation in front of our little faces is either really mean or a little slow on the uptake.

You can have the freedom to choose without the weakness to have your decisions swayed by temptation.

I'm not saying that God isn't perfect, or that God isn't nice. I am saying that a biblical God can't be both.

Originally posted by Griffo
reply to post by randyvs

 

If god was all knowing/powerful why did he give Adam and Eve free will then? As he knew they would eat from the tree. Or better still, why did he create satan, because if he was all knowing he would have known that satan would trick them from eating from the tree

There is a lot in the bible that contradicts the nature of god as being omniscient. Still more that contradicts omnibenevolence. It's difficult to see how bible followers can make such claims.

Originally posted by randyvs

Adam did choose for all of us. Adam is mankind. God dosn't play." What's good for the goose is good for the gander", and the whole bit . We messed up with God. Not the other way around. However he has provided.

Well, WE didn't mess up. The first ignorant creation did (according to the bible, of course). Yet, all subsequent persons are to pay for this infraction. This is equivalent to punishing your grandchild for something your child did as an infant. This not what I would call moral, yet many believe our morality derives from this immoral god.

Originally posted by sykickvision
Take a look at the world during the Middle Ages. That's pretty much where we'd still be if all we did was rely on god to provide our answers for us instead of us taking the initiative.
I believe that if god does exist, he would want us to question everything, to investigate and find out.

Firstly the Middle Ages was not that man could not get answers from God but that the Catholic Church kept information from man. Such as the Bible and anything that did not suit the Church to keep control of men.

Secondly the Middle Ages was caused by the fall of Rome, which during their rein the world was quite intelligent.
Due to the spread of information through the empire. Once they fell the nations divided into their original boundaries, and quit communicating with each other. Hence the knowledge of the elders quickly ceased, as it does today. Do you know how to milk a cow, or weave a blanket, or start a fire? Could you build a shelter? Now maybe you can but how many here on ATS could do these things or many of the simple tasks in a society that does not use today's Tech to survive?

Yes the Catholic Church who by my opinion are not Christian did and do adhere to keep knowledge from man.

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38
Firstly the Middle Ages was not that man could not get answers from God but that the Catholic Church kept information from man. Such as the Bible and anything that did not suit the Church to keep control of men.

This presumes that the bible had some kind of valuable information for man, though there is little good in it beyond some basic ethics that were already mostly codified into law. In fact, most of what we know of the bible is that much of it was seriously in error and could never have been authored by a divine being or those inspired by one. Perhaps the Church realized they had a faulty jalopy of a book and didn't want the public to wise up.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Well, WE didn't mess up. The first ignorant creation did (according to the bible, of course). Yet, all subsequent persons are to pay for this infraction. This is equivalent to punishing your grandchild for something your child did as an infant. This not what I would call moral, yet many believe our morality derives from this immoral god.

Seems as if I'm left with no arguement to these findings. BUT.

Surely you know me as someone who is just as capable of these simple minded thoughts as you are. I hope I hope. So, how do I make my way around and still see God as benevolent? Because we have all sinned. No one was with out sin. God has provided though. Provided a way out. This stuff makes so much sense to me and is why I choose to try and live by it. I must admit though to all of you I am far from perfect and fall way short everyday of my life. But God knows my heart. I am trying. That's all he expects I hope I hope.

Originally posted by TheWill
reply to post by randyvs

 

No, I am not.

I am saying that a God that makes us susceptible to temptation and then waves temptation in front of our little faces is either really mean or a little slow on the uptake.

You can have the freedom to choose without the weakness to have your decisions swayed by temptation.

I'm not saying that God isn't perfect, or that God isn't nice. I am saying that a biblical God can't be both.

See but you say he is the one waving temptation in our faces. Where do get this way off completely out there idea. Who have you been listening to partnher. Not true Not true at all young person.

Originally posted by randyvs
So, how do I make my way around and still see God as benevolent? Because we have all sinned. No one was with out sin. God has provided though. Provided a way out.

Doesn't it seem convoluted and arbitrary though? God is eternally ticked because of original sin, an infraction based upon an arbitrary rule. However, instead of forgiving or maybe even accepting the lower status and qualities of humans he sets up another arbitrary rule: accept that the human sacrifice of Jesus redeems you from your lowly sinner status. Otherwise, you may face Hell - either a literal place or torment of eternal separation from God. While one could possibly view the human sacrifice of Jesus as benevolent (if viewed as a "way out"), ominbenevolence is out of the question since only those who accept Jesus have access to this God. If Christianity is correct, then only a fraction of the people on earth are subject to this benevolence.

reply to post by randyvs


Sorry, I tend to use figures of speech more often than is good for me.

As per the bible, who made the tree and told us that we must not eat of it?

(That's what I mean by waving temptation in our face)

Impaired

This is directed at the Abrahamic god. This is not directed at any other possibility of creation.

With that said, I will remain agnostic - which is admitting that I just don't know.

"I just don't know" - what's so hard about that? And that's where I disagree with atheists.

Atheists seem ignorant to the fact that there is an order in the universe (or at least that some kind of entity created it all). But I can't stand how the Abrahamic Religion Complex (all 3 - I'm not picking on just 1) ruins it for others. My theory is that most atheists are angry at "god" because they can't stand Yahweh and his ridiculous actions.

This ruins it for those atheists because since Yahweh and Allah hog up the word "god" (which I think is a gross misnomer), they think the only possibility of a god (perhaps - I could be wrong - I admit, unlike others) is a scumbag entity.

So I will stay right here in the middle - admitting that we can't know if there is a god and if there is we just don't have enough information yet to actually describe it (I personally believe in a NEUTRAL creation entity of some sort which we would all be a part of if we came from the same singularity).

But I, of course, will state that's just a BELIEF - NOT FACT. Why do others have to promulgate their god or TOTAL lack of god/creator to be the truth?????????

Both sides appear ignorant in their own ways, but I will side with an atheist over a typical creationist any day.

In the light of your stance on the issue I think this an excellent post.

Bet you thought I was just going to ignore you again huh ? Not at all, I just have to ask you to please, stay away from that one pet peave. :lol :No hard feelings as that is a fault of mine not yours. Just irratating, I dunno.

reply to post by randyvs


Thanks, dude. Like I said - I'm in the middle. I can't make claims that I don't know to be true.

Agnosticism - the lonely position of neutral!

And I apologize for my utter condescension in my earlier posts in this thread. You were justified in my eyes to come back at me the way I came.

I admit I have issues with the things we talk about, but I just want truth or something close to it. That's all.

We are indeed in this all together and I tend to forget that a lot.