Why would God send someone to hell over suicide?

[cultcross]

And I believe your beliefs are silly. To believe the universe sprang from nothingness when observation and experience show us that nothing comes from nothing seems crazy to me.

You are however happy to attribute the physical rules of this universe to whatever came before it or whatever is outside it without the slightest shred of evidence that they apply. Your observations and experiences of the internal physical laws of a universe are not relevant to its creation, any more than the rules of a computer program govern the world before it was executed.

 

[Rusty phaser]

And I believe your beliefs are silly. To believe the universe sprang from nothingness when observation and experience show us that nothing comes from nothing seems crazy to me.

So where did your god come from then?

I of course know that your answer will be that it has always existed. But if this is your answer I'd like you to contemplate that if we are allowed to say that something can always have existed, why can't then that which today is the universe always have existed?

What is more logical, that the most simple thing always has existed or that the most ultimately advanced always has existed?

 

[Pingfah]

^ Apparently they're staying out of this thread...

You can be offensively self-righteous sometimes you know.

What does this even mean? That all atheists must consider believers to be dumb or ignorant because they aren't in this thread not calling people dumb or ignorant?

If this is your standard for proof of non-aggression, then it's no wonder you consider the whole world to be against you

 

[Jayson]

If doubt is accepted within the concept of faith then what makes faith all that special? How does faith become something more than a opinion when doubt is introduced because if you have doubt it means your open to the idea that your spirtiutal beliefs are wrong. I think people use the word 'faith" because it sounds good and people don't want to be open to the idea that they religious views are wrong. Because if they are wrong it could mean anything from them picking the wrong religion to God not really exsiting.

Jason

 

[TheLonelySquire]

And I believe your beliefs are silly. To believe the universe sprang from nothingness when observation and experience show us that nothing comes from nothing seems crazy to me.

So where did your god come from then?

I of course know that your answer will be that it has always existed. But if this is your answer I'd like you to contemplate that if we are allowed to say that something can always have existed, why can't then that which today is the universe always have existed?

What is more logical, that the most simple thing always has existed or that the most ultimately advanced always has existed?

My answer would be that since God created the universe He is not bound by its physical laws. I certainly don't have all the answers and would never pretend to. All I'm saying is that his belief is as silly to me as mine is to him.

As for my own experience, I know God exists. Some people want to believe it. I didn't. I've always been a skeptic. But once you know, you know.

And I personally am fine with someone believing whatever they want. It's their decision and their future...

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

BTW, what about Dobzhansky? I've been meaning to ask you for WEEKS. (BTW, in my opinion he's totally right in EVERY department where it counts. )

Yeah nice, so he was relgious and evolutionist. So? Some people believe that God merely started the process, but the world still works as the result of natural cumulative processes that we can observe, measure, and demonstrate. I have less of a problem with such people, though I would ask them why they would add the god baggage save for the fact that, to them, they are answering a mystery with a bigger mystery instead of admitting that they "don't know."

I would say there are two main reasons: non-quantifiable/non-falsifiable experiences, which are seen by those of us who believe as an additional facet of the human experience that cannot be fully explained by science. These are the experiences that by nature I cannot transfer to you for you to experience as I do, no more than you can give me one of your dreams to see, experience, and feel as you did, with your thoughts, emotions, and sensations.

This leads into the second, which is that while science does wonderfully with answering the questions of where, what, when, and how, as far as how all of this came to be and where it's headed, it does not answer the questions of who and why. Even though it exhibits the elegance of a master artwork, by itself, it does not tell us anything about the ethics we should apply to what we discover, nor its purpose. Pure science, and math, are a set of facts and possibilities, wholly neutral in moral and ethical bent. It tells us what can be done, but nothing about whether or not we should do something, or under what circumstances.

To people like Collins, Dobzhansky, and myself, it's about assembling the most complete understanding of the world in which we live and how we should relate to it, to each other, and to our creator--to answer all six questions, in other words, not just the four that science provides answers to. Of course there is much we still do not know about the natural processes of the world, and we will always be learning and refining what we know. This isn't a mere "God-of-the-gaps" stance where belief is destroyed at the discovery of the next layer--as I said, I fully expect that process of discovery to continue for as long as we're in this world to continue it. It's much like continuing to calculate the digits of an irrational number...there's always something more to find. Faith is not the end of exploration. It is a starting point and a path.

Or, as one C.S. Lewis put it, there is always more to explore "further up and further in."

 

[Rusty phaser]

This leads into the second, which is that while science does wonderfully with answering the questions of where, what, when, and how, as far as how all of this came to be and where it's headed, it does not answer the questions of who and why. Even though it exhibits the elegance of a master artwork, by itself, it does not tell us anything about the ethics we should apply to what we discover, nor its purpose. Pure science, and math, are a set of facts and possibilities, wholly neutral in moral and ethical bent. It tells us what can be done, but nothing about whether or not we should do something, or under what circumstances.

I knwo I'm intruding in the discussion, but I'm simply bored. So pardon me if I misunderstand something :P
-

But does there really have to be a "who" and a "why"? To me those two questions only sort of come into existence once they are actually asked .... if that makes any sense. The question of "who" assumes there has to be someone out there, and thus the question itself seems to eliminate the answer "noone".

A "why?" on the large scale is also somewhat pointless ... at least to me. The answer that most religions seem to provide does not satisfy me any more than not answering the question at all would. In the grand scheme of things I accept that there simply is no big point in my existens (other than that it satisfied my parents wish of creating me) - nor do I really care for there to be one.
Even if you go to God-explanations those do not feel satisfiable to me either. What is the point of living forever up in the sky? Why would there me more point in that than in what we have now?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Apparently they're staying out of this thread...

You can be offensively self-righteous sometimes you know.

What does this even mean? That all atheists must consider believers to be dumb or ignorant because they aren't in this thread not calling people dumb or ignorant?

No, just going by what those that *do* post in this thread are doing.

Making fun of a belief is making fun of everyone who has that belief. Because a belief is part of what a person is - you slam the belief, you slam the person who has it.

It's like politics, in a way. Whatever you say about any politician, you are also saying about everyone who voted for him/her.

That's absurd. So you think you can't criticize tenets of a religion you disagree with or the platform/actions of a politician without it being a direct personal attack on their believers and supporters?

One can criticize without being insulting.

At least in theory.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Even though there may be things that are non-falsifiable and non-quantitative or whatever does not give you justification for asserting that they a god exists. Again, the point comes up: what caused God. God would have to be infinitely more complex than the universe. If god doesn't need an explanation, neither does the universe.

"I don't know" is an intellectually honest answer.

I think people athropomorphize the universe and they cal it God. Just like I can anthropomorphize my stuffed turkey my friend gave me from build-a-bear workshop.

 

[RJDiogenes]

My answer would be that since God created the universe He is not bound by its physical laws.

Since matter and energy can't be created or destroyed (on the macro scale) in what we know as the Universe, obviously we exist in a larger context with different rules. So whether we were created by a god that simply is or live in a Universe that simply is, any laws of causality are local phenomena. Six of one, half a dozen of another.

No, just going by what those that *do* post in this thread are doing.

I've Posted in this Thread, so you're obviously wrong.

 

[Pingfah]

No, just going by what those that *do* post in this thread are doing.

I've Posted in this Thread, so you're obviously wrong.

No, obviously you and I are both offensive jackasses who sneer at people of faith, but just have yet to show it.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Here's another point: atheists and other non-believers might know there is no such place as Hell, but I wouldn't be surprised if more of them decided to take offence at the mere idea of hell. I mean the sentiment that we deserve eternal suffering is there.

 

[Amaris]

Here's another point: atheists and other non-believers might know there is no such place as Hell, but I wouldn't be surprised if more of them decided to take offence at the mere idea of hell. I mean the sentiment that we deserve eternal suffering is there.

In some cases, such as those espoused by my best friend (who does not know I'm an atheist), it is felt that we ask for it by denying God.

J.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

yeah but that doesn't mean that we, or anyone, deserve eternal torture simply for being skeptical.

 

[Rusty phaser]

Here's another point: atheists and other non-believers might know there is no such place as Hell, but I wouldn't be surprised if more of them decided to take offence at the mere idea of hell. I mean the sentiment that we deserve eternal suffering is there.

Well, I doubt that most christians actually themselves think we deserve eternal torture - I guess they more accept it as the price we have to pay for dissidence. Thus at least I don't really take offense by it. I just think it's sad that they can accept it and still maintain their belief in their god as good and loving.

All things considered, I find it quite funny that christians have the audacity to criticize for example Saddam Husseins torture of dissidents.

 

[Amaris]

yeah but that doesn't mean that we, or anyone, deserve eternal torture simply for being skeptical.

Well, no, any person with even the most basic level of human compassion wouldn't feel someone should suffer eternal torment just for being skeptical, but when you add in a very ardent follower of the Christian faith, such as my friend, well, that compassion gets overridden by dogma, and eventually they begin to feel that someone's eternal torment is justifiable on the grounds they didn't accept Jesus.

When people tell you "they make their own choice", it's a nice, neat little way of washing their hands of the whole thing.

J.

 

[Pingfah]

^ J, it's clear that you have been dissatisfied with religion for a long time, but what has caused you to abandon theism?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I agree with Shatmandu, and I think Mr. Lazer Beam is a nut, no offence.

Yes offense. Please don't make comments like that about fellow Posters.

I was out of line there.

I apologize!

Apology accepted.

 

[Amaris]

^ John, it's clear that you have been dissatisfied with religion for a long time, but what has caused you to abandon theism?

I simply do not believe God exists. I think I mentioned it somewhere, but it wasn't one slash, but a thousand tiny cuts that did in my faith. It was like waking from a dream, and realizing that everything you saw, no matter how real it felt, was nothing more than a fabricated environment, one suited to one's own benefit and to fit one's own biases. The dissatisfaction you mentioned was indeed a part of it. I saw people giving up intelligent, reasonable thought in favor of ridiculous ideas like Young Earth Creationism, or working to inhibit scientific discovery because they felt God's arbitrary rules should be the answer to everything.

My mind was always working to understand the truth of something, the facts as they were, and for years I fought to understand and parse faith. I was chided for "thinking too much" about who and what God was supposed to be, being told "that way leads to madness", which is true, because it didn't make a damned lick of sense. So it became "God's ways are not our ways", which is just another way of saying someone has no answer for you, but refuses to consider that maybe that's because the idea of God as presented in the Bible is terribly conflicted.

Then there were the excuses about why people should go to hell or why God was angry with gay people. There was my knowledge on the history of the Bible, and the history of the Church itself, and the many studies of other religions I had done, the hours poring over old texts and talking to Pastors, Rabbis, Imams, other holy leaders and just finally coming to the conclusion that the whole thing was, to coin George Carlin, "a bunch of bullshit".

Everybody had a theory on something, and not one person was ever able to produce one scrap of evidence to show that their path was the correct one to follow, but vociferously would they argue it's sacred Truth. I started feeling that it was an invisible best friend contest, and people were competing over which one was better and more real.

I was able to let go of my faith with complete peace of mind.

J.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

yeah but that doesn't mean that we, or anyone, deserve eternal torture simply for being skeptical.

Well, no, any person with even the most basic level of human compassion wouldn't feel someone should suffer eternal torment just for being skeptical, but when you add in a very ardent follower of the Christian faith, such as my friend, well, that compassion gets overridden by dogma, and eventually they begin to feel that someone's eternal torment is justifiable on the grounds they didn't accept Jesus.

When people tell you "they make their own choice", it's a nice, neat little way of washing their hands of the whole thing.

J.

Well, it's not "washing our hands" of it. It's recognizing that each person is responsible for themselves. Perhaps that's why a many Christians are conservatives. We believe in self-determination.