If the God of the Bible existed, I’d do my best to make him not exist.
If he knew everything and could do anything, I know I’d probably fail. But hey! Better to die than live under that kind of tyranny.
If he had the power to create me with the free will to defy him, he has the power to take that free will away. That’s a worthless form of free will!
If he was all-good and loved me, I still wouldn’t forgive him. Because, you know what, my mother loves me and would do anything in her power for me, but we still don’t let her have the power to do whatever she wants for me, do we? We value our independence!
A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.
I don’t believe in God, but let me tell you this, if a scientific experiment proves tomorrow that the God of the Bible is real, it doesn’t follow logically that I need to worship him. There’s truth in that adjective God-fearing. If God is real, I’d be really afraid, because no matter how good his intentions, no matter how much he loves me, that much power concentrated in one person can’t be good.
God is the ultimate police state. He see and hears everything. God is the perfect totalitarian. He has complete control.
What life would be worth living if it’s not your life to live? If your life is just in the hands of God?
If you can show me God exists, the first thing I’ll do is make the Case For Satan!
"And when death comes to call me,
I’m soothed by the everlasting sleep
Of being buried as a Christian
With a headstone beside the sea.
My only wish is there be hundreds
Of every kind of flower giving life at the grave.
With that thought, thank God
My soul, at least, will be smiling.””
Domhnall Eirisgeach, Crowned Bard 1949.
Translation from Gaelic by Candide.
A man who was his own father impregnated his own (virgin) mother, grew up and went about giving well-meaning but impractical advice while planning to get himself tortured and crucified to sacrifice himself, to himself, to exploit a loop-hole that he created to save humanity from an arbitrary rule that he created, after which he rose from the dead and became a man in the sky who loves you and who will do worse than kill you if don’t love him back.
You’re not a Christian because you make straw man arguments to get out of understanding, or even trying to understand, what we actually believe.
There is no such thing as a “man in the sky” for one, because God is incorporeal. Just for one thing.
Jesus is not the Father, and the Father is not Jesus, but both are God. So no, again, you are factually incorrect about that.
“well-meaning but impractical” advice? It’s only impractical if you don’t find ways to make it practical. Because treating others how I would like to be treated is pretty practical. It means you don’t be a douchebag to other people, basically. You don’t treat them like shit. you respect them.
“Will do worse than kill you”. Uhm… No. God doesn’t send people to Hell. People send themselves. If you don’t want to be around God, God isn’t going to force you to be with God. That would completely undermine free will.
Is this not the second time you’ve reblogged my rather tongue-in-cheek post??? And also: having been raised by devout Catholics, and myself still a churchgoer (for family reasons I can’t help), I feel that is quite a reasonable summary of Christian belief. And of course, because this is an exercise in religious discourse, I am can quite simply say this is what I [=my Church] believes and you have no right to question it. I have faith that this is why I am not a Christian, I have faith that this is what most Christians believe. You have faith in Christianity. Let’s be religious and respect each other’s views cos, well, we believe ‘em don we?
Well, you’ve admitted now that you only go because you’re made to go. You probably haven’t taken a theology course beyond the high school level, and if you have, I find it probable that you didn’t take it seriously.
This post is insulting to me for being a Christian. You think it’s tongue-in-cheek, but it’s not. It’s derisive and inflammatory. I’m not questioning what you believe, I’m saying that what you said is insulting.
Well, I am in high school so that can’t be helped. For what its worth I spent this afternoon discussing ‘what is life’ with the school chaplain (who has a doctorate in philosophy) and he seems to think I have a decent head on me…
May I ask: so what???
If I were to write a post, say, criticizing Marxism by taking its doctrines and theories literally in a tongue-in-cheek fashion , would ‘but you’re insulting my beliefs’ be a satisfactory response? In a free society one has the right to criticize, possible offend, the political beliefs of others. Why not the religious beliefs? Science progresses by self-criticism and peer-review - why is it only religion that is allowed to get rid of criticism by calling it ‘insulting.’???