Is it entirely unnecessary and insulting to inform people...

[William]

Is it entirely unnecessary and insulting to inform people...That they are evil in the sight of GOD and bound for hell?

As a human being, how is such theology acceptable and a good and reasonable thing to be stating or even implying of others, on a debate forum or even in day to day life?

Are people right to be able to take a stand against such theology and call it out for being dated, dark, based upon information from dark ages, based in ignorance and evil of intent?

What gives individuals the right to say such things about others?

Is it a form of abuse?

Should others have to take that kind of abuse about their persons without protesting it?

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 108 by For_The_Kingdom]

2. The idea that an explosion took place at a paint factory, and with all of that disorder/chaos at the factory, all of the paint fell from the sky and ultimately fell-in-to-place on a very large canvas on the ground, of which patterned itself to resemble the Sistine Chapel ceiling. (atheism, naturalism)

You tell me which one is senseless.

Your scenario is senseless in that it bears no relation to our models of how the universe developed after the Big Bang to the evolution of species on Earth. In other words you have merely created a straw man to demolish and it has almost nothing to do with atheism.

What about the model of a magical being who needed to be worshiped and made an enormous galaxy to house a bunch of humans on a minuscule planet, most of which is inhospitable? In the process, he screwed up a number of times and came up with the absurd solution to clone himself and have himself killed as a sacrifice to himself to allow himself to forgive his killers. And, after all that, nothing changed.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 108 by For_The_Kingdom]

When you imply "killing isn't love"...you are presupposing a standard, a standard by which God isn't abiding by.

It always appalls me when Christians have to associate killing with love in order to whitewash their barbaric God.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 109 by For_The_Kingdom]

Instead of acknowledging the specifics of what I said as it directly relates to the main idea of what you said, you ignore it, and continue to go on this tangent about how "the need to be killed was set down by his father".

The need for a human sacrifice is based on hearsay, which is all you can get from scripture. The validity of claims made in the Bible have not been demonstrated. It is all just a matter of faith. Faith is believing in stuff that has not been substantiated. So when God sacrificed himself to himself to appease himself, there is no demonstrable reason why this even needed to be the case. The fact that it is morally abhorrent should not be overlooked either.

[ttruscott]

What about the model of a magical being who needed to be worshiped and made an enormous galaxy to house a bunch of humans on a minuscule planet, most of which is inhospitable? In the process, he screwed up a number of times and came up with the absurd solution to clone himself and have himself killed as a sacrifice to himself to allow himself to forgive his killers. And, after all that, nothing changed.

A wonderful example of telling the story badly for exaggerated humorous effect but sadly failing as a logical analysis due to straw man syndrome.

[For_The_Kingdom]

Your scenario is senseless in that it bears no relation to our models of how the universe developed after the Big Bang to the evolution of species on Earth. In other words you have merely created a straw man to demolish and it has almost nothing to do with atheism.

Nonsense. It is the perfect analogy.

Paint factory just sitting there for whatever reason = the singularity just sitting there for whatever reason

Paint factory exploding for whatever reason = the singularity expanding for whatever reason

Paint in the air = matter and energy floating around in the universe

Paint falling on canvas and being patterned into pictures of humans = matter forming into physical human beings

Now, you can certainly believe what you want, however, neither science nor logic supports it. How unfortunate.

What about the model of a magical being who needed to be worshiped and made an enormous galaxy to house a bunch of humans on a minuscule planet, most of which is inhospitable? In the process, he screwed up a number of times and came up with the absurd solution to clone himself and have himself killed as a sacrifice to himself to allow himself to forgive his killers. And, after all that, nothing changed.

Hahahahhahahahaa. I am literally laughing out loud!!

[For_The_Kingdom]

It always appalls me when Christians have to associate killing with love in order to whitewash their barbaric God.

Appealing to emotions. Fallacious. Still don't know why killing is wrong on atheism/naturalism.

[For_The_Kingdom]

The need for a human sacrifice is based on hearsay, which is all you can get from scripture.

Well obviously if you don't believe it, it means nothing to you.

The validity of claims made in the Bible have not been demonstrated.

It has been to me.

It is all just a matter of faith.

Reasonable faith.

Faith is believing in stuff that has not been substantiated.

When you go to a restaurant, do you test your food for poison before you eat it? No? Why not? You certainly didn't substantiate whether or not the cook poisoned the food.

So when God sacrificed himself to himself to appease himself, there is no demonstrable reason why this even needed to be the case.

Another misrepresentation of the Trinity, I presume.

The fact that it is morally abhorrent should not be overlooked either.

According to whose standard, yours?

[William]

[Replying to post 105 by ttruscott]

What do you think about my contention that the faith (an unproven belief) that there is no GOD is an unproven hope because the consequences of HIS being real are so onerous?

I think it is unnecessary and insulting to inform people that most of them are eternally evil and that the consequences are that they all are on their way to hell and damnation under the directive of a GOD which created a place of eternal suffering in flames which won't consume them but simply torment them forever.

That idea of a GOD is a bad apple. If the Devil exists, then that is where this idea of GOD comes from. It is an evil idea of GOD. It is of an entity who cannot figure out better ways to proceed and sweeps problems under the carpet, blames others rather than taking responsibility for his actions - rather than facing them and sorting them out logically - and has no faith in the process of eternity as a means of dealing with evil so that it no longer contaminates any of his creation.

It takes the idea of a short-sighted entity and tries to prop him up as an eternal divinity, and fails miserably.

I think such beliefs which inform people that this is their fate is a way of insulting them and subtly belittling the notion of GOD, through the 'legitimizing' filter of belief. To be able to insult individuals and groups without fear of being warned one is breaking the first law is a loop-hole. The expression might be tolerated because 'belief' but this does't make it any less unnecessary for that.

What does one think about my contention that the faith (an unproven belief) that there is such GOD as the one which created hell and sends people there to endure torment forever, is an unproven 'hope' because the consequences of HIS being unreal are so unpredictable?

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 114 by ttruscott]

A wonderful example of telling the story badly for exaggerated humorous effect but sadly failing as a logical analysis due to straw man syndrome.

I was just emulating your creativity in producing the painting scenario. At least mine was closer to the supposed reality of the biblical story.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Is it entirely unnecessary and insulting to inform people...That they are evil in the sight of GOD and bound for hell?

As a human being, how is such theology acceptable and a good and reasonable thing to be stating or even implying of others, on a debate forum or even in day to day life?

Are people right to be able to take a stand against such theology and call it out for being dated, dark, based upon information from dark ages, based in ignorance and evil of intent?

What gives individuals the right to say such things about others?

Is it a form of abuse?

Should others have to take that kind of abuse about their persons without protesting it?

If a person is insulted, then I suppose to them, it is insulting. Personally, I am never insulted by the foolish things that others believe, although I am often dismayed that others can cling so fiercely to things that seem so obviously foolish. But I have learned to accept that one person's revealed truth is another person's silly foolishness.