lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: The Problem of Hell and a Loving God
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 10-22-2009, 10:16 PM   #1
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
The Problem of Hell and a Loving God

YT

I think people sometimes accept poor theological "arguments" because they have a tendency to be abstract. CDK007 fixes that problem for this particular bit o' apologist rhetoric.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-23-2009, 12:23 AM   #2
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
finally... a bit of evidence that will get people to give up their beliefs and love one another unconditionally...........



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-23-2009, 12:31 AM   #3
acdcfanbill
..the wonders I have seen
 
acdcfanbill's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Random Hell Wholes around the
Posts: 5,697
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! 
The area of evidence is one that theists care little for.

acdcfanbill is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-23-2009, 02:55 AM   #4
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
Would those who would otherwise go to hell love god back? Would it be right for those who do love god to suffer from those who don not?

To use a similar idea, I think we have a duty of care in the world. You go to most places in the world and there are lawd and punishments to ensure that duty of care. Some places have death as a punishment. Should we then remove these laws and punishments because they are not loving?
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 12:46 PM   #5
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter
finally... a bit of evidence that will get people to give up their beliefs and love one another unconditionally...........
How unfortunate that we seem to be confused as to the difference between "evidence" and "argumentation" (or in this case maybe "counter-").

Or perhaps you opted to comment without first making some effort to find out what you were commenting on?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead
Would those who would otherwise go to hell love god back? Would it be right for those who do love god to suffer from those who don not?

To use a similar idea, I think we have a duty of care in the world. You go to most places in the world and there are lawd and punishments to ensure that duty of care. Some places have death as a punishment. Should we then remove these laws and punishments because they are not loving?
I think this kinda misses the point.

If god loves us all, then how can hell exist? Either hell isn't real, god isn't real, or god doesn't love us all. Which of these options 1) makes the most sense (and is consistent with the evidence) or 2) are we the most comfortable with?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q
And the Damned Fool Anti-Theistic Crusade™ begins anew.
Your participation, as always, is completely voluntary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q
OCD is such an ugly thing.
In light of my comment above, it certainly would seem to be the case, wouldn't it?
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 02:28 PM   #6
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
How unfortunate that we seem to be confused as to the difference between "evidence" and "argumentation" (or in this case maybe "counter-").

Or perhaps you opted to comment without first making some effort to find out what you were commenting on?
no to both of those. actually i was thinking maybe you could make a thread about everyone on youtube who makes a few videos about god then maybe if you make enough of them religion will die or whatever



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 04:56 PM   #7
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
I think this kinda misses the point.

If god loves us all, then how can hell exist? Either hell isn't real, god isn't real, or god doesn't love us all. Which of these options 1) makes the most sense (and is consistent with the evidence) or 2) are we the most comfortable with?
"Father" is a term ofter used in relation to god. A father who disciplines his children would still love them. While the concept of hell might seem severe, would it be any better were those who did not love god allowed to make those who do love god suffer?
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-23-2009, 01:08 PM   #8
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
And the Damned Fool Anti-Theistic Crusade™ begins anew.

OCD is such an ugly thing.


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker

Last edited by Q; 10-23-2009 at 01:45 PM.
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 04:06 PM   #9
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
I'll work on that.

Maybe you could start a thread on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and post some articles and then maybe if you post enough of them both sides will decide to stop fighting or something.

Or maybe social consciousness is only cool when you do it. I don't know.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 04:17 PM   #10
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
ah yes i forgot some random youtuber making a video is newsworthy



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 04:23 PM   #11
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
ah yes i forgot some random youtuber making a video is newsworthy
I certainly think the content of the video is worth discussion. If you don't then you're free to not participate.

So would you like to discuss the content or would you like to continue whatever problem it is you have with me and/or post more strawmen about video authors (rather than the videos themselves).

P.S. the Senate is a serious discussion forum. "Serious discussion" is not limited to "newsworthy". I hope that helps.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 04:19 PM   #12
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
"renowned scholar cdk007 has published a video today, from the looks of the video it is entitled 'unregistered powervideomaker', although this has yet to be confirmed."

-the ap



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 04:50 PM   #13
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
i will discuss the video then. it is 3 minutes of drivel during which professor cdk007 ignores the fact that he is talking about how unless god loves us all as much as we love the most important person in our lives this somehow disproves the fact that there is a god. think about that for a second, how much any of us love 1 person is his standard and god has to meet that standard for billions of us? you can't be serious, and i hope you reconsider calling yourself logical if you truely believe this is at all rational



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 05:01 PM   #14
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
i will discuss the video then.
Great.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
it is 3 minutes of drivel during which professor cdk007 ignores the fact that he is talking about how unless god loves us all as much as we love the most important person in our lives this somehow disproves the fact that there is a god.
Actually, it's a condensed, real-world take on one aspect of the problem of evil. Perhaps you're not familiar with that theological argument, hence why you're unable to recognize the context.

It does not "somehow disprove the fact that there is a god".

It does demonstrate that the problem of evil is a valid theological argument and that apologetics are insufficient to address it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
think about that for a second, how much any of us love 1 person is his standard and god has to meet that standard for billions of us?
I've thought about it for a lot of seconds. I'd ask you to think about your own argument for a second:

Either our standards are based on gods or they are not. If they are and god is not able to meet his own standard, then there is a problem. If they are not then how do we get our standards? Are our standards higher or lower than god's. Either way you go, this is also a problem for god.

So, I do agree with you that one of us does need to spend some time thinking about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
you can't be serious, and i hope you reconsider calling yourself logical if you truely believe this is at all rational
Perhaps a stronger counter-argument would indeed give me cause for further reflection. At this point, I think I'm still okay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
"Father" is a term ofter used in relation to god. A father who disciplines his children would still love them. While the concept of hell might seem severe, would it be any better were those who did not love god allowed to make those who do love god suffer?
This is precisely the point raised in the video.

Assume for a second that your assumption is correct and discipline ala "tough love" is the best standard for raising "children". Are you saying that a spanking for breaking a vase and spending an eternity is a lake of fire for not loving your parents "enough" is the same thing? If yes, then there's your answer, thanks for playing, and we're all done here. If no, then we have to ask ourselves why our standards would appear to be more merciful and more loving than god's. Which is a huge problem because "he" is supposed to be ALL-loving and we're supposed to be fallible.

Even if "tough love" is the answer, god's version of it seems extreme to at least some of us and runs counter to any presupposition that god is omnibenevolent. Can't have it both ways here.

Last edited by Achilles; 10-24-2009 at 05:08 PM.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 05:29 PM   #15
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Perhaps a stronger counter-argument would indeed give me cause for further reflection. At this point, I think I'm still okay.
you just responded to that post, so get reflecting



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 05:37 PM   #16
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
And you just responded to the post where I countered your post. You're certainly welcome not to acknowledge that your points have been countered, but really won't mean very much here.

You could opt to address my counter-arguments (either to point out where my logic is flawed, or perhaps learn something), but it's certainly not mandatory.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 08:08 PM   #17
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
I conducted a little bit of research and came across this.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...6114620AAn1ETq

It may not be the answer you are looking for but it attempts to explain why there is a hell if god loves us.
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 08:11 PM   #18
Pho3nix
#rekt
 
Pho3nix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,370
Forum Veteran 
Yahoo answers?

Oh brother.

Pho3nix is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 08:22 PM   #19
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pho3nix View Post
Yahoo answers?

Oh brother.
I thought "Best Answer - Chosen by Asker" was the best part

@lockhead: this doesn't introduce anything new. A great deal of that response is completely unrelated to the question. What little that is there doesn't address the video from the OP. All it does is repeat the argument that video counters. In other words, it's not progress. All it does is repeat step 1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
You would prefer Richard Dawkins answer the question perhaps?
I think appealing to authority (regardless of whose "authority" you appeal to) doesn't help either. We should be looking the argument that makes the most sense. Not which answer comes from the person we like the most.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 08:21 PM   #20
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
You would prefer Richard Dawkins answer the question perhaps?
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 08:59 PM   #21
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
I believe it prudant to ask, what type of answers are you looking for?
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2009, 09:22 PM   #22
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
"Serious ones" would probably be the most succinct.

Something that is supported by evidence or is at least both logically sound and consistent would be absolutely fabulous.

I recommend using the link I provided in post 14 as a jumping off point for further research.

This episode of the reasonable doubts podcast might also have some food for thought as well.

And if you want to invest a little more time into the matter, you could also try this book by Bart Ehrman (interview here)
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 12:41 AM   #23
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
I want to reflect back what I think you're saying. You're saying that god cannot exist because of the concept of hell?

To try and answer the question of why there is a need for hell, say you were running this forum. One day someone comes in and starts acting obnoxious. They argue, they fight, and they threaten the forum staff when they intercede. What do you do?
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 12:58 AM   #24
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
I want to reflect back what I think you're saying. You're saying that god cannot exist because of the concept of hell?
No. I'll once more repeat what I am saying:

Either hell isn't real, god isn't real, or god doesn't love us all.

There is as much (or as little) room for the middle option as you care for, but one of those things has to be true.

Obviously, if you opt for the middle option, then the third is void as well and the first one kinda loses any significance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
To try and answer the question of why there is a need for hell, say you were running this forum. One day someone comes in and starts acting obnoxious. They argue, they fight, and they threaten the forum staff when they intercede. What do you do?
The analogy is not even worth my time. You're welcome to try again though.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 02:42 AM   #25
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Either hell isn't real, god isn't real, or god doesn't love us all.
Or both Evil and Hell are necessary for some reason.


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 01:32 AM   #26
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
I am afraid that you seem to have taken the position that it has to be one of those three, to the point of ignoring anything that suggests otherwise. Reading your posts I believe this is to try and prove there is no god, and that is the only answer that you are interested in. If that is the case then the only answer that would be accepted would be that god does not exist.
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 01:46 AM   #27
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
I am afraid that you seem to have taken the position that it has to be one of those three, to the point of ignoring anything that suggests otherwise.
Such as what?

If there are other options that you feel I am missing, please feel free to point out what they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
Reading your posts I believe this is to try and prove there is no god, and that is the only answer that you are interested in.
I'm interested first and foremost in the truth. Since there is neither evidence to support the case for god nor logical arguments to provide even the most basic foundation of such a proposition, I don't see how it would be very consistent for me to claim to be interested in the truth and accept such a claim simultaneously.

Rather than attempt to address any of the points I've raised in previous posts, it appears that you've moved on to personal attacks. An unfortunate, but common, tactic used by creationists.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
If that is the case then the only answer that would be accepted would be that god does not exist.
Since I stated precisely the opposite not once, but twice (most recently in the post you just replied to), I don't see how you could come to this conclusion.

What is the case is that if christians want to be consistent in their case for god, at least one part of their story needs to change. From my vantage point, it would seem that "god is not onmi-benevolent" would be the least painful of the three. Without hell, there's no need for jesus. And accepting that there is no god is no longer theism.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 01:54 AM   #28
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
To which, I try and answer your questions, however you are not interested in that particular answer. I try and explain why there can be a god and a hell yet you do not wish to listen. And you draw the conclusion that I am a creationist making personal attacks. If you refuse to listen to what is put forward then there is nothing anyone on the forum can do to help you.
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 02:32 AM   #29
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
To which, I try and answer your questions, however you are not interested in that particular answer.
The Yahoo! Answers link you posted. I'm not interested in that answer because it's garbage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
I try and explain why there can be a god and a hell yet you do not wish to listen.
Which post?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
And you draw the conclusion that I am a creationist making personal attacks.
I'm assuming that you're a creationist. The personal attacks isn't a matter of opinion - it's a matter of fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
If you refuse to listen to what is put forward then there is nothing anyone on the forum can do to help you.
Which implies that I want or need "help".

I put forth something for discussion. You're not doing much in the way of "discussing" here.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 03:37 AM   #30
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
I put forward a simple test, the one about dealing with someone who was a problem on the forums. You chose to ignore it which suggests you are not interested in listening to anything that does not fit within any conclusion you may have already made. To ignore attempts to answer your questions and dismiss them as rubbish further implies that point. And I could get involved in an epic flame war over the topic of religion against someone who going by their history here has years of experience making anyone who disagrees with them look like fools.

No thanks, I have a life.
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 04:04 AM   #31
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
You chose to ignore it which suggests you are not interested in listening to anything that does not fit within any conclusion you may have already made.
Yes, that's Achilles' MO, alright. To know him is to love him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead
And I could get involved in an epic flame war over the topic of religion against someone who going by their history here has years of experience making anyone who disagrees with them look like fools.
Hm, you seem to know a lot more about the situation than someone who has all of, what, 15 posts really should. You wouldn't happen to be someone's alt, would you? That's a no-no around here.


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 04:26 AM   #32
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
Hm, you seem to know a lot more about the situation than someone who has all of, what, 15 posts really should. You wouldn't happen to be someone's alt, would you? That's a no-no around here.
As Totenkopf pointed out it would only require a quick read through of someone's post history to suss out their general habits and style. And I figured I have much better things to do than to get hung up in a debate that no one wins.
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 04:34 AM   #33
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
I was sort of kidding, you know.

Anywho, if you've read back far enough, you'll know that Achilles does this from time to time in order to hook some naive and unfortunate believer so that he can reel them in, trap them and grind them into dust with his logic, which makes absolutely no sense, given that this is a subject with an illogical answer.

Now, I'll leave to your imagination what exactly this accomplishes. He seems to get off on it, though, so that's probably it.


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 06:01 AM   #34
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
Or both Evil and Hell are necessary for some reason.
Such as?

"Necessary" in what way? You mean to argue that an all-powerful god is simply "playing by the rules"? Whose rules would those be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
I put forward a simple test, the one about dealing with someone who was a problem on the forums.
The analogy was poor then and it's poor now. You were invited to provide a better one and opted not to. That certainly isn't my problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
And I could get involved in an epic flame war over the topic of religion against someone who going by their history here has years of experience making anyone who disagrees with them look like fools.
I certainly cannot take credit for the indefensible positions of others.

Speaking of...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
Anywho, if you've read back far enough, you'll know that Achilles does this from time to time in order to hook some naive and unfortunate believer so that he can reel them in, trap them and grind them into dust with his logic, which makes absolutely no sense, given that this is a subject with an illogical answer.
"naive and unfortunate believer". A lot of people post here. None of them seem either able or willing to provide solid argumentation for their positions. By your own description, are they all "naive and unfortunate believers"?

And hopefully you saw this coming:

"a subject with an illogical answer". If you're conceding that there is no logical argument for god, then why are you here? Spam?

That's a no-no too isn't it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
Now, I'll leave to your imagination what exactly this accomplishes.
Perhaps nothing. Or perhaps from time to time I say or present something that causes someone to 2nd guess a position they've always held but never questioned. Maybe that person eventually gives up their crutch and the world becomes a better place for it. Or maybe my efforts are nothing more than a means for you to increase your post count. I suppose we may never know for sure.

Regardless, at least I can tell myself that I do something potentially constructive with my time here. Much the same way I imagine you get a feeling of accomplishment in the tech forums.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
I kind of figured you were, but on a serious topic, I'm of the belief that anyone who says god cannot exist if there is hell, for example, well that's just their opinion.
You're welcome to point out where anyone (other than you) suggested this. I can point out twice where I've clearly not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lockhead View Post
I really cannot be bothered to get a fly up my nose about it. I also think anyone who looks to go on a crusade will only destroy themselves...what a waste of logic for someone to do that to themselves.
Ok, so you'll be on your way now? Toodles.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2009, 06:32 AM   #35
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
"Necessary" in what way?
I wouldn't pretend to know. The book of Job is probably the closest thing to an explanation for the Satanic challenge of senseless evil as fallen man will ever get, and even there God states that we would not understand the answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
You mean to argue that an all-powerful god is simply "playing by the rules"?
He would be hypocrite if He didn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Whose rules would those be?
His, of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
"a subject with an illogical answer". If you're conceding that there is no logical argument for god...
There is no logical argument for our existence either, but, then, here we are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
...then why are you here? Spam?

That's a no-no too isn't it?
No more so than starting dozens of threads over the years obsessively hammering away at the same point; a point which you cannot conclusively prove (namely that God doesn't exist).


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-27-2009, 12:39 AM   #36
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
I wouldn't pretend to know. The book of Job is probably the closest thing to an explanation for the Satanic challenge of senseless evil as fallen man will ever get, and even there God states that we would not understand the answer.
Obviously, we (this includes you) do pretend to know a great many things when it comes to morality. Yet our standards of "moral" and "immoral" differ from "his". The book of job itself makes this obvious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
He would be hypocrite if He didn't.
Afraid you not only missed the point, but managed to contradict the first part of your post.

If god is all-powerful, then why is he beholden to rules unless they are rules that he himself made. Why would he create rules that limit his options? And why would our rules (rules that most people would consider to be more moral than those demonstrated by god) be "better" than his?

The "we can't know god" defense is either absolute or it is not. It seems more than a little dishonest to use it when it's convenient but ignore it when we think we're justified. It's called "trying to have it both ways".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
His, of course.
Okay. So he's responsible for hell? You are putting forth that they are necessary via his rules and he cannot change them (even though he is allegedly "all-powerful"). So remind me again how this does not contradict the idea of an all-loving god.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
There is no logical argument for our existence either, but, then, here we are.
Of course there is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Q View Post
No more so than starting dozens of threads over the years obsessively hammering away at the same point; a point which you cannot conclusively prove (namely that God doesn't exist).
I don't need to. Surely, you've been here long enough to see at least one or two posts re: the burden of proof.

You also seem to be way off on your assumptions regarding my motivations. Since you have been around for a while and are so clearly obsessed with what I post, you also know that I've never once stated that I believe that god can be disproved (so your comment above is either dishonest or simply dead wrong).

I'm not here to disprove something I believe can be disproved. I'm here to educate, inform, and hopefully, every once in a while, persuade. Same thing your good buddy does with his israel/palestine threads, etc, etc, etc.

In fact, I would argue that it's what most people who actually contribute to the serious discussion thread attempt to do. The fact that you single me out is just another amusing reminder that if I do in fact have OCD, I'm suffering in good company
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-27-2009, 10:35 AM   #37
Q
The one who knocks
 
Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ABQ
Posts: 6,643
Current Game: Mowing down neos with my M60
LF Jester Forum Veteran Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
You also seem to be way off on your assumptions regarding my motivations.
You seem to forget that you've subjected me to your "methods of persuasion" before. They revealed to myself and anyone who was paying attention that your motivations are not even remotely as wholesome as you'd like everyone to believe. Your continued attempts to paint them as such are laughable.


"They should rename the team to the Washington Government Sucks. Put Obama on the helmet. Line the entire walls of the stadium with the actual text of the ACA.
Fix their home team score on the board to the debt clock, they can win every game 17,000,000,000,000 to 24. Losing team gets taxed by the IRS 100%, then droned."
-Toker
Q is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 11-27-2009, 12:58 AM   #38
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
I'm not here to disprove something I believe can be disproved. I'm here to educate, inform, and hopefully, every once in a while, persuade.
You're seeking to try and help build a master race?
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 04:41 AM   #39
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
I kind of figured you were, but on a serious topic, I'm of the belief that anyone who says god cannot exist if there is hell, for example, well that's just their opinion. I really cannot be bothered to get a fly up my nose about it. I also think anyone who looks to go on a crusade will only destroy themselves...what a waste of logic for someone to do that to themselves.
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-25-2009, 06:24 AM   #40
lockhead
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Current Game: Rock Band 2
You like Chef Aid don't you? You're a big fan of it?
lockhead is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > The Problem of Hell and a Loving God

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:18 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.