Bring on World War 3. . .

[achilles12604]

I had an ephinany in church today. I believe I have decided for myself who's side God is on.

But I wanted to throw this out into the water and see where it goes for a bit first.


So the question for debate is this. . .


Who's side is God on? What makes you believe that this is true?

Considering the amount of suffering, poverty, crime, genocide, pestilence, disease, wars, starvation, subjugation, rapes, molestations, etc.... that currently exist globally, I really have to wonder which side He is on as well. If I had to judge it based on humanity, I would have to say that God is on the side of those who would cause harm because He sure isn't providing much protection to those who are trying to do good. But this is strictly MHO.

This made me think. Is the world REALLY this screwed up? Or is the world still decent enough to warrant living in?

If it is as described above, then would it not be better to simply start world war 3, have every launch Nukes, and if any one survives they can start over with a clean (albeit radioactive) slate?

Is this world worth keeping?

[OnceConvinced]

Well so far it's 5-0 against. I guess everybody so far is probably more merciful than what God will be.

When I was a Christian, I may have been tempted to click on "Fire!". At one stage there I actually looked forward to Armageddon, because it would have meant the end of the world and I would finally be in Heaven.

Hmm. More merciful than God?

Has he clicked fire? If not, (which is the correct answer) how do you figure we are more merciful? Wouldn't we be equally merciful since we made the same choice?

Only if you take the world wide flood, and the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah literally has he 'clicked fire'. If you take the millerites concept of the End of the World and Armageddon literally, then God is supposed to be preparing to do just that.

The flood yes. Sodom and Gomorrah no. Destroying them had no effect on the entire world.

Whether they effect the entire world or not, they can still hardly be considered merciful acts. God was still willing to press the fire button.

Actually you could argue that the distruction of S&G has affected the world. Surely, it's one of the big reasons Homosexuality is considered immoral throughout the world.

[Cogitoergosum]

It is understandable, knowing human's knack for survival, that when you have limited resources and too many people conflict is the outcome. But why would there be limited resources if God created this world for us?
My point was that this world is exactly how you would expect it to be if there was no God.
Hell in all the known universe to us so far, billions and billions of miles, not one human friendly planet was discovered so far. Hell this planet is not human friendly in many areas. 70% is water, antarctica is too freaking cold, africa with its big sahara, earthquakes, tornadoes, volcanoes, hurricanes, land slides.....
It is obvious god is trying to take care of us.

So we are somehow "entitled" to perfection if God exists? Hmm . . . are you familiar with the TV show "the simple life"? Perhaps the world would indeed be better if it was filled with Hiltons. People who are given every luxury by the all loving God. That would be a great place to live.

I for one don't particularly care that this world is not perfect. Life wouldn't make much sense without some adversity.

You have to admit though that if we were the purpose of creation of an intelligent and loving GOD, the world should be friendlier to us. This world is far from perfect and sometimes far from friendly.
I don't watch the "Simple life". But you have to admit that the more confortable in life you are the less likely you are to cause havoc and misery.

You mean like Brit or Paris or Lindsay or Tom?

The more comfortable people are in life, the more likely they are to assume that everyone is below them. Which social class has been the cause of most of the worlds persecutions? The lower or the higher?

Also, the more confortable someone is, the less likely they will feel the need to bow to someone else, so a perfectly comfortable world full of Hiltons would not want, or "need" God.

So God is the biggest exploitationist of all according to you. He does not want to give us what we need to live a comfortable life because then we will not need him and we wouldn't feel like satisfying his ego by bowing to him.
Reminds me of the story of william Tell where god has his hat on a pole and wants us to bow to him every time we pass it.

[Beto]

Is this world worth keeping?

I'm happy as a cucumber, so my answer is definitely "yes".

Also, the more confortable someone is, the less likely they will feel the need to bow to someone else, so a perfectly comfortable world full of Hiltons would not want, or "need" God."

I agree with you in the sense that a world without misery or suffering wouldn't need a god (Satan's job makes sense in that regard). Is this what you mean by "confortable world"? Are you saying a confortable life is something to be avoided?

[jamesearl]

Well so far it's 5-0 against. I guess everybody so far is probably more merciful than what God will be.

When I was a Christian, I may have been tempted to click on "Fire!". At one stage there I actually looked forward to Armageddon, because it would have meant the end of the world and I would finally be in Heaven.

Hmm. More merciful than God?

Has he clicked fire? If not, (which is the correct answer) how do you figure we are more merciful? Wouldn't we be equally merciful since we made the same choice?

Only if you take the world wide flood, and the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah literally has he 'clicked fire'. If you take the millerites concept of the End of the World and Armageddon literally, then God is supposed to be preparing to do just that.

The flood yes. Sodom and Gomorrah no. Destroying them had no effect on the entire world.

Whether they effect the entire world or not, they can still hardly be considered merciful acts. God was still willing to press the fire button.

Actually you could argue that the distruction of S&G has affected the world. Surely, it's one of the big reasons Homosexuality is considered immoral throughout the world.

Homosexuality is not seen as "immoral" were i am. I think you mean United States generally, and then the Muslim world.

The rest of the world, or rather, tje Majority of the world, as most Asian are quite acceptant of homosexuality, lady-boys etcetera, i would say its a minority claiming this "morality" thing.

[achilles12604]

It is understandable, knowing human's knack for survival, that when you have limited resources and too many people conflict is the outcome. But why would there be limited resources if God created this world for us?
My point was that this world is exactly how you would expect it to be if there was no God.
Hell in all the known universe to us so far, billions and billions of miles, not one human friendly planet was discovered so far. Hell this planet is not human friendly in many areas. 70% is water, antarctica is too freaking cold, africa with its big sahara, earthquakes, tornadoes, volcanoes, hurricanes, land slides.....
It is obvious god is trying to take care of us.

So we are somehow "entitled" to perfection if God exists? Hmm . . . are you familiar with the TV show "the simple life"? Perhaps the world would indeed be better if it was filled with Hiltons. People who are given every luxury by the all loving God. That would be a great place to live.

I for one don't particularly care that this world is not perfect. Life wouldn't make much sense without some adversity.

You have to admit though that if we were the purpose of creation of an intelligent and loving GOD, the world should be friendlier to us. This world is far from perfect and sometimes far from friendly.
I don't watch the "Simple life". But you have to admit that the more confortable in life you are the less likely you are to cause havoc and misery.

You mean like Brit or Paris or Lindsay or Tom?

The more comfortable people are in life, the more likely they are to assume that everyone is below them. Which social class has been the cause of most of the worlds persecutions? The lower or the higher?

Also, the more confortable someone is, the less likely they will feel the need to bow to someone else, so a perfectly comfortable world full of Hiltons would not want, or "need" God.

So God is the biggest exploitationist of all according to you. He does not want to give us what we need to live a comfortable life because then we will not need him and we wouldn't feel like satisfying his ego by bowing to him.
Reminds me of the story of william Tell where god has his hat on a pole and wants us to bow to him every time we pass it.

Perhaps you should take part in another thread . . . specifically the one I created with you in mind.

I created this thread just to deal with the issues you have raised here. So please join me there to discuss what God SHOULD be doing according to you, or anyone else who has already posted there.

[achilles12604]

Is this world worth keeping?

I'm happy as a cucumber, so my answer is definitely "yes".

Also, the more confortable someone is, the less likely they will feel the need to bow to someone else, so a perfectly comfortable world full of Hiltons would not want, or "need" God."

I agree with you in the sense that a world without misery or suffering wouldn't need a god (Satan's job makes sense in that regard). Is this what you mean by "confortable world"? Are you saying a confortable life is something to be avoided?

Not necessarily. However, when someone has everything, they tend to start leaning their own ways.

The phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely" is very true. If someone has everything (say a dictator) then they start to believe that they are above all laws, moral and otherwise. Big trouble can result from this type of thinking. We see a smaller version of this phenomenon here with our wonderful movie stars. They tend to think law doesn't apply to them anymore simply because they are so rich and famous.

[achilles12604]

Whether they effect the entire world or not, they can still hardly be considered merciful acts. God was still willing to press the fire button.

So . . . what are you saying here? That no one should ever be punished for anything? Or even more to the point, there should be no accountability for anyone and all actions, no matter how harmful to the self, or others should be tolerated?

Actually you could argue that the distruction of S&G has affected the world. Surely, it's one of the big reasons Homosexuality is considered immoral throughout the world.

If you say so. I do not agree with this sentiment, but if you want to make that leaping connection, it's ok with me.

[Cogitoergosum]

The phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely" is very true.

Would that apply to gods too?

[zepper899]

Well so far it's 5-0 against. I guess everybody so far is probably more merciful than what God will be.

When I was a Christian, I may have been tempted to click on "Fire!". At one stage there I actually looked forward to Armageddon, because it would have meant the end of the world and I would finally be in Heaven.

Hmm. More merciful than God?

Has he clicked fire? If not, (which is the correct answer) how do you figure we are more merciful? Wouldn't we be equally merciful since we made the same choice?

Only if you take the world wide flood, and the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah literally has he 'clicked fire'. If you take the millerites concept of the End of the World and Armageddon literally, then God is supposed to be preparing to do just that.

The flood yes. Sodom and Gomorrah no. Destroying them had no effect on the entire world.

Whether they effect the entire world or not, they can still hardly be considered merciful acts. God was still willing to press the fire button.

Actually you could argue that the distruction of S&G has affected the world. Surely, it's one of the big reasons Homosexuality is considered immoral throughout the world.

Homosexuality is not seen as "immoral" were i am. I think you mean United States generally, and then the Muslim world.

The rest of the world, or rather, tje Majority of the world, as most Asian are quite acceptant of homosexuality, lady-boys etcetera, i would say its a minority claiming this "morality" thing.

i guess we can say that we have at least 10 good people right.
that is all it takes according a literal interpretation of genesis

[OnceConvinced]

Whether they effect the entire world or not, they can still hardly be considered merciful acts. God was still willing to press the fire button.

So . . . what are you saying here? That no one should ever be punished for anything? Or even more to the point, there should be no accountability for anyone and all actions, no matter how harmful to the self, or others should be tolerated?

No, I'm not saying that at all. But what about all the innocent children that suffered as a result of God's wrath? God also had a habit of punishing people for things other people did in the OT. ie. family members and ancestors.

I personally find it hard to believe that everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah was evil and find it hard to believe that Noah and his family were the only Godly people in the world at their time either.