Page 31 of 44

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 26th, 2022, 5:53 pm
by LuckyR
Charlemagne wrote: October 24th, 2022, 6:44 am
LuckyR wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 5:24 pm
Charlemagne wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 12:10 pm
Belindi wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 4:55 am

We agree that it's good to aspire towards the good God .

If God is aspirational and only aspirational then He is not substantial. We will never know for sure whether or not God is substantial, although I have an argument that He is substantial as well as aspirational.
If we aspire to know God we need to ask why we do that? Is it because God is substantial, or only because aspiring to God boosts our ego? Or is it possible that God is substantial and has created us for the purpose of aspiring to know him up close and personal? These are the questions Blaise Pascal dealt with in such depth. He argued that proofs of God not being conclusive for some, they can only gamble that God exists or does not exist. The gamble is imperative. There is no other choice. If we gamble that God does not exist, and he does exist, we stand to lose everything. If we gamble that he does exist, and he does exist, we stand to gain everything.
Not if a god is omniscient. Meaning, if a god knows everything, they should be able to tell that you are "believing" in the god solely because of a logical calculation to avoid eternal damnation reserved for non-believers.

Which brings up a more disturbing issue, namely what does it say about a being infinitely more powerful than another who is so insecure, emotionally that it is going to react so spitefully (sending such insignificant beings to eternal damnation) because beings infinitely insignificant comparitively won't worship him? Do you personally care if an ant won't acknowledge that you are more powerful than they are? If not, your psyche sounds better put together than such a god's.
LuckyR,

That is one way to look at it. The other way is to see not that God is so insecure as to damns us (being God, why would he be insecure?) but that by rejecting him we are made insecure by damning ourselves.
Well, that's one way to look at it, though some might say that it sounds like an explanation designed to conclude with the predetermined answer.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 27th, 2022, 10:46 am
by Charlemagne
Sy Borg wrote: October 25th, 2022, 5:51 pm
Consul wrote: October 25th, 2022, 11:01 am
Sy Borg wrote: October 24th, 2022, 5:31 pm That is your imagination, Charlie. How do you discover that your male God exists after death when you have no mind, no awareness, no consciousness? Do you see your masculine deity in your deep sleep every night? Do you dream about him?
A bodiless person or pure spirit is sexless, since sex is determined by biological/physiological characteristics, and a pure spirit doesn't have any such characteristics whatsoever; so the holy spirit might only be male or female by gender. But what does this mean? The god of monotheism is the only one of his kind, not living in a community or society of many deities, so his gender couldn't consist in a particular social role in a society of deities—the "female/feminine role"/"the male/masculine role". The gender of God could only consist in a particular state of mind: "the female/feminine mind/mentality"/"the male/masculine mind/mentality". But what exactly is it that makes a mind or a mentality (personality) female/feminine or male/masculine? I'm afraid any attempt to define gender in purely psychological terms ends up with an arbitrary list of (questionable) sexual stereotypes.
As you have nicely described, many Christians need God to be male, unable to bear the idea of having a female boss. I'm with you, a bodiless spirit can't have a gender, it is an "it". However, in the legends Santa is male and so is God.

There are many similarities between God and Santa Claus. A bearded old man who runs everything, who rewards and punishes as he sees fit. Basically, they are archetypes of ancient community leaders.
Now you're playing the Sigmund Freud card, totally without merit.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 27th, 2022, 10:50 am
by Charlemagne
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 10:46 am
Sy Borg wrote: October 25th, 2022, 5:51 pm
Consul wrote: October 25th, 2022, 11:01 am
Sy Borg wrote: October 24th, 2022, 5:31 pm That is your imagination, Charlie. How do you discover that your male God exists after death when you have no mind, no awareness, no consciousness? Do you see your masculine deity in your deep sleep every night? Do you dream about him?
A bodiless person or pure spirit is sexless, since sex is determined by biological/physiological characteristics, and a pure spirit doesn't have any such characteristics whatsoever; so the holy spirit might only be male or female by gender. But what does this mean? The god of monotheism is the only one of his kind, not living in a community or society of many deities, so his gender couldn't consist in a particular social role in a society of deities—the "female/feminine role"/"the male/masculine role". The gender of God could only consist in a particular state of mind: "the female/feminine mind/mentality"/"the male/masculine mind/mentality". But what exactly is it that makes a mind or a mentality (personality) female/feminine or male/masculine? I'm afraid any attempt to define gender in purely psychological terms ends up with an arbitrary list of (questionable) sexual stereotypes.
As you have nicely described, many Christians need God to be male, unable to bear the idea of having a female boss. I'm with you, a bodiless spirit can't have a gender, it is an "it". However, in the legends Santa is male and so is God.

There are many similarities between God and Santa Claus. A bearded old man who runs everything, who rewards and punishes as he sees fit. Basically, they are archetypes of ancient community leaders.
Now you're playing the Sigmund Freud card, totally without merit.
No, I don't dream about God in my sleep. I don't dream about you either. What's your point. Seems pointless!

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 27th, 2022, 4:18 pm
by Sy Borg
Not sure why you are babbling about dreaming. Further, pointing out patriarchal attitudes is not Freudian, it's just extremely obvious that God would be a male since Middle Eastern societies have long been notoriously patriarchal.

Further, God and Santa are similar in that they are wise old men who know more than usual mortal. They know if you have been naughty or if you have been nice, and they dole out gifts or punishments accordingly. God is basically a father for fathers, someone but he is on 365/7, including ... as you sleep. The patriarchal deity is always there watching, just waiting for a small mistake, for which it can throw the person into eternal hellfire where they will burn and writhe in agony for all time - because he loves us so much.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 27th, 2022, 4:57 pm
by Sculptor1
Dark Matter wrote: October 18th, 2017, 12:32 am
Spectrum wrote: Absolute perfection is an impossibility in the empirical, thus exist only theoretically.
The latter does not logically follow from the former.
Please demonstrate a perfect circle in reality.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 27th, 2022, 5:26 pm
by Charlemagne
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 4:18 pm Not sure why you are babbling about dreaming. Further, pointing out patriarchal attitudes is not Freudian, it's just extremely obvious that God would be a male since Middle Eastern societies have long been notoriously patriarchal.

Further, God and Santa are similar in that they are wise old men who know more than usual mortal. They know if you have been naughty or if you have been nice, and they dole out gifts or punishments accordingly. God is basically a father for fathers, someone but he is on 365/7, including ... as you sleep. The patriarchal deity is always there watching, just waiting for a small mistake, for which it can throw the person into eternal hellfire where they will burn and writhe in agony for all time - because he loves us so much.
No, he doesn't throw us into hell. Where did you get that notion? We throw ourselves into hell, especially if we hate God so much and want nothing to do with him and offer God the ultimate insult of denying that he even exists.

Freud hated God, and he hated his own father, who it has been reported molested his children.

And I doubt that Freud had much use for Santa who is the modern celebration of a real-life character, Saint Nicholas of Causa.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 27th, 2022, 8:31 pm
by Sy Borg
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 5:26 pm
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 4:18 pm Not sure why you are babbling about dreaming. Further, pointing out patriarchal attitudes is not Freudian, it's just extremely obvious that God would be a male since Middle Eastern societies have long been notoriously patriarchal.

Further, God and Santa are similar in that they are wise old men who know more than usual mortal. They know if you have been naughty or if you have been nice, and they dole out gifts or punishments accordingly. God is basically a father for fathers, someone but he is on 365/7, including ... as you sleep. The patriarchal deity is always there watching, just waiting for a small mistake, for which it can throw the person into eternal hellfire where they will burn and writhe in agony for all time - because he loves us so much.
No, he doesn't throw us into hell. Where did you get that notion? We throw ourselves into hell, especially if we hate God so much and want nothing to do with him and offer God the ultimate insult of denying that he even exists.

Freud hated God, and he hated his own father, who it has been reported molested his children.

And I doubt that Freud had much use for Santa who is the modern celebration of a real-life character, Saint Nicholas of Causa.
I think you may need to tell the Bible that God does not send people to hell after they die:
"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8
"And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” - Matthew 25:46
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might 2 Thessalonians 1:9
50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. - Matthew 13:50

There's no need to hate God, because it probably does not exist in an objective sense. Yahweh of the Old Testament was indeed a despicable character, although so was Allah and Zeus. I dislike these characters of myth in much the same way as I disliked King Joffrey from Game of Thrones or Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars.

I love myths. Their characters do indeed live subjectively in the minds and emotions of many.

BTW, not sure what you are doing battle with Freud since the psychodynamic school of psychology fell out of favour some time ago. You can let the dead horse lie in peace.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 27th, 2022, 10:37 pm
by Charlemagne
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 8:31 pm
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 5:26 pm
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 4:18 pm Not sure why you are babbling about dreaming. Further, pointing out patriarchal attitudes is not Freudian, it's just extremely obvious that God would be a male since Middle Eastern societies have long been notoriously patriarchal.

Further, God and Santa are similar in that they are wise old men who know more than usual mortal. They know if you have been naughty or if you have been nice, and they dole out gifts or punishments accordingly. God is basically a father for fathers, someone but he is on 365/7, including ... as you sleep. The patriarchal deity is always there watching, just waiting for a small mistake, for which it can throw the person into eternal hellfire where they will burn and writhe in agony for all time - because he loves us so much.
No, he doesn't throw us into hell. Where did you get that notion? We throw ourselves into hell, especially if we hate God so much and want nothing to do with him and offer God the ultimate insult of denying that he even exists.

Freud hated God, and he hated his own father, who it has been reported molested his children.

And I doubt that Freud had much use for Santa who is the modern celebration of a real-life character, Saint Nicholas of Causa.
I think you may need to tell the Bible that God does not send people to hell after they die:
"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8
"And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” - Matthew 25:46
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might 2 Thessalonians 1:9
50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. - Matthew 13:50

There's no need to hate God, because it probably does not exist in an objective sense. Yahweh of the Old Testament was indeed a despicable character, although so was Allah and Zeus. I dislike these characters of myth in much the same way as I disliked King Joffrey from Game of Thrones or Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars.

I love myths. Their characters do indeed live subjectively in the minds and emotions of many.

BTW, not sure what you are doing battle with Freud since the psychodynamic school of psychology fell out of favour some time ago. You can let the dead horse lie in peace.
I think you miss the point of all those quotes from the Bible you just gave. It's understandable because you clearly are not Christian and have no background in Christian theology. From the time of Adam and Eve on, Yahweh made contracts with the human race. The first contract was to obey just one commandment. Yahweh said to Adam and Eve:

"You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. From that tree you shall not eat; when you eat from it you shall die."

So they knew that if they disobeyed God, they would be condemning themselves to die. Actions have consequences. The same with the Ten Commandments. Again, St. Paul reminds sinners that their sins (freely chosen) will condemn them to spiritual death (hell).

Again, Jesus reminds us that when we freely choose to reject him, he will freely choose to reject us. Matthew 10:32-33

So you see going to hell (whatever hell is) is a freely chosen act, because we rejected the will of God, thinking our ego is bigger than his. God will not be mocked, and because he created us, we are free to choose to be forever glorified or forever damned. That is God's way. God makes the rules. We do not.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 27th, 2022, 10:48 pm
by Charlemagne
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 8:31 pm BTW, not sure what you are doing battle with Freud since the psychodynamic school of psychology fell out of favour some time ago. You can let the dead horse lie in peace.
Well, it just seemed to me that you were trying to resurrect Freud by comparing Santa with God. Freud did a lot of that sort of silly comparison, as when he compared modern homosexuals with King Oedipus.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 28th, 2022, 4:31 am
by Sy Borg
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 10:48 pm
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 8:31 pm BTW, not sure what you are doing battle with Freud since the psychodynamic school of psychology fell out of favour some time ago. You can let the dead horse lie in peace.
Well, it just seemed to me that you were trying to resurrect Freud by comparing Santa with God. Freud did a lot of that sort of silly comparison, as when he compared modern homosexuals with King Oedipus.
Then your association was mistaken. The similarities I mentioned are far from silly, they are indisputable.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 28th, 2022, 6:13 am
by Belindi
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 4:18 pm Not sure why you are babbling about dreaming. Further, pointing out patriarchal attitudes is not Freudian, it's just extremely obvious that God would be a male since Middle Eastern societies have long been notoriously patriarchal.

Further, God and Santa are similar in that they are wise old men who know more than usual mortal. They know if you have been naughty or if you have been nice, and they dole out gifts or punishments accordingly. God is basically a father for fathers, someone but he is on 365/7, including ... as you sleep. The patriarchal deity is always there watching, just waiting for a small mistake, for which it can throw the person into eternal hellfire where they will burn and writhe in agony for all time - because he loves us so much.
God as portrayed in The Bible develops from the early portrayal as punishing sins that have been committed. Later on the Biblical Prophets portray God as judging not according to what you do but according to your intentions.

The early punitive Jaweh had to contend with defensive or aggressive tribal gods of place which were not such a hazard in later centuries, so morality could become more benign towards the individual.

The following from Britannica is about how Isaiah was a main man for the paradigm of social justice:


Dictionary
Quizzes
Money
Isaiah
The Book of Isaiah, comprising 66 chapters, is one of the most profound theological and literarily expressive works in the Bible. Compiled over a period of about two centuries (the latter half of the 8th to the latter half of the 6th century BCE), the Book of Isaiah is generally divided by scholars into two (sometimes three) major sections, which are called First Isaiah (chapters 1–39), Deutero-Isaiah (chapters 40–55 or 40–66), and—if the second section is subdivided—Trito-Isaiah (chapters 56–66).

The prophecies of First Isaiah
First Isaiah contains the words and prophecies of Isaiah, a most important 8th-century BCE prophet of Judah, written either by himself or his contemporary followers in Jerusalem (from c. 740 to 700 BCE), along with some later additions, such as chapters 24–27 and 33–39. The first of these two additions was probably written by a later disciple or disciples of Isaiah about 500 BCE; the second addition is divided into two sections—chapters 33–35, written during or after the exile to Babylon in 586 BCE, and chapters 36–39, which drew from the source used by the Deuteronomic historian in II Kings, chapters 18–19. The second major section of Isaiah, which may be designated Second Isaiah even though it has been divided because of chronology into Deutero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah, was written by members of the “school” of Isaiah in Babylon: chapters 40–55 were written prior to and after the conquest of Babylon in 539 by the Persian king Cyrus II the Great, and chapters 56–66 were composed after the return from the Babylonian Exile in 538. The canonical Book of Isaiah, after editorial redaction, probably assumed its present form during the 4th century BCE. Because of its messianic (salvatory figure) themes, Isaiah became extremely significant among the early Christians who wrote the New Testament and the sectarians at Qumrān near the Dead Sea, who awaited the imminent messianic age, a time that would inaugurate the period of the Last Judgment and the Kingdom of God.

Isaiah, a prophet, priest, and statesman, lived during the last years of the northern kingdom and during the reigns of four kings of Judah: Uzziah (Azariah), Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was also a contemporary of the prophets of social justice: Amos, Hosea, and Micah. Influenced by their prophetic outcries against social injustice, Isaiah added themes peculiar to his prophetic mission. To kings, political and economic leaders, and to the people of the land, he issued a message that harked back nearly five centuries to the period of the judges: the holiness of Yahweh, the coming Messiah of Yahweh, the judgment of Yahweh, and the necessity of placing one’s own and the nation’s trust in Yahweh rather than in the might of ephemeral movements and nations. From about 742 BCE, when he first experienced his call to become a prophet, to about 687, Isaiah influenced the course of Judah’s history by his oracles of destruction, judgment, and hope as well as his messages containing both threats and promises.

Intimately acquainted with worship on Mt. Zion because of his priest-prophet position, with the Temple and its rich imagery and ritualistic practices, and possessed of a deep understanding of the meaning of kingship in Judah theologically and politically, Isaiah was able to interpret and advise both leaders and the common people of the Covenant promises of Yahweh, the Lord of Hosts. Because they were imbued with the following beliefs—God dwelt on Mt. Zion, in the Temple in the city of Jerusalem, and in the person of the King—the messianic phrase “God is with us” (Immanuel) Isaiah used was not a pallid abstraction of a theological concept but a concrete living reality that found its expression in the Temple theology and message of the great prophet.


In chapters 1–6 are recorded the oracles of Isaiah’s early ministry. His call, a visionary experience in the temple in Jerusalem, is described in some of the most influential symbolic language in Old Testament literature. In the year of King Uzziah’s death (742 BCE), Isaiah had a vision of the Lord enthroned in a celestial temple, surrounded by the seraphim—hybrid human-animal-bird figures who attended the deity in his sanctuary. Probably experiencing this majestic imagery that was enhanced by the actual setting and the ceremonial and ritualistic objects of the Jerusalem Temple, Isaiah was mystically transported from the earthly temple to the heavenly temple, from the microcosm to the macrocosm, from sacred space in profane time to sacred space in sacred time.


Yahweh, in the mystical, ecstatic experience of Isaiah, is too sublime to be described in other than the imagery of the winged seraphim, which hide his glory and call to each other:

“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts;

The whole earth is full of his glory.”

With smoke rising from the burning incense, Isaiah was consumed by his feelings of unworthiness (“Woe is me! for I am lost”); but one of the seraphim touched Isaiah’s lips with a burning coal from the altar and the prophet heard the words, “Your guilt is taken away, and your sin forgiven.” Isaiah then heard the voice of Yahweh ask the heavenly council, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” The prophet, caught up as a participant in the mystical dialogue, responded, “Here am I! Send me.” The message to be delivered to the Covenant people from the heavenly council, he is informed, is one that will be unheeded.

The oracles of Isaiah to the people of Jerusalem from about 740 to 732 BCE castigate the nation of Judah for its many sins. The religious, social, and economic sins of Judah roll from the prophet’s utterances in staccato-like sequence: (1) “Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and sabbath and the calling of assemblies—I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly,” against religious superficiality; (2) “cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; defend the fatherless, plead for the widow,” against social injustice; and (3) “Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow,” a call for obedience to the Covenant. The prophet also cried out for peace: “and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.” The sins of Judah, however, are numerous: the rich oppress the poor, the nation squanders its economic resources on military spending, idolatry runs rampant in the land, everyone tries to cheat his fellowman, women flaunt their sexual charms in the streets, and there are many who cannot wait for a strong drink in the morning to get them through the day. One of Isaiah’s castigations warns: “Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine, and valiant men in mixing strong drink, who acquit the guilty for a bribe, and deprive the innocent of his right!”

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 28th, 2022, 2:53 pm
by Charlemagne
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 10:37 pm
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 8:31 pm
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 5:26 pm
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 4:18 pm Not sure why you are babbling about dreaming. Further, pointing out patriarchal attitudes is not Freudian, it's just extremely obvious that God would be a male since Middle Eastern societies have long been notoriously patriarchal.

Further, God and Santa are similar in that they are wise old men who know more than usual mortal. They know if you have been naughty or if you have been nice, and they dole out gifts or punishments accordingly. God is basically a father for fathers, someone but he is on 365/7, including ... as you sleep. The patriarchal deity is always there watching, just waiting for a small mistake, for which it can throw the person into eternal hellfire where they will burn and writhe in agony for all time - because he loves us so much.
No, he doesn't throw us into hell. Where did you get that notion? We throw ourselves into hell, especially if we hate God so much and want nothing to do with him and offer God the ultimate insult of denying that he even exists.

Freud hated God, and he hated his own father, who it has been reported molested his children.

And I doubt that Freud had much use for Santa who is the modern celebration of a real-life character, Saint Nicholas of Causa.
I think you may need to tell the Bible that God does not send people to hell after they die:
"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8
"And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” - Matthew 25:46
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might 2 Thessalonians 1:9
50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. - Matthew 13:50

There's no need to hate God, because it probably does not exist in an objective sense. Yahweh of the Old Testament was indeed a despicable character, although so was Allah and Zeus. I dislike these characters of myth in much the same way as I disliked King Joffrey from Game of Thrones or Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars.

I love myths. Their characters do indeed live subjectively in the minds and emotions of many.

BTW, not sure what you are doing battle with Freud since the psychodynamic school of psychology fell out of favour some time ago. You can let the dead horse lie in peace.
I think you miss the point of all those quotes from the Bible you just gave. It's understandable because you clearly are not Christian and have no background in Christian theology. From the time of Adam and Eve on, Yahweh made contracts with the human race. The first contract was to obey just one commandment. Yahweh said to Adam and Eve:

"You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. From that tree you shall not eat; when you eat from it you shall die."

So they knew that if they disobeyed God, they would be condemning themselves to die. Actions have consequences. The same with the Ten Commandments. Again, St. Paul reminds sinners that their sins (freely chosen) will condemn them to spiritual death (hell).

Again, Jesus reminds us that when we freely choose to reject him, he will freely choose to reject us. Matthew 10:32-33

So you see going to hell (whatever hell is) is a freely chosen act, because we rejected the will of God, thinking our ego is bigger than his. God will not be mocked, and because he created us, we are free to choose to be forever glorified or forever damned. That is God's way. God makes the rules. We do not.
The whole ancient world was patriarchal and most of it still is except where the feminists rule. It's an ancient and universal instinct to understand that the male seed is required for procreation. That is the starting point, and without the male seed life cannot continue. That is why ancient pagan civilizations saw even their male gods as patriarchal, Zeus being the father of Athena, the most powerful of the female goddesses. The Jews were the only race to see through the stupidity of polytheism. But like all the pagan religions, Jews also could see that their God had to be Father of all, because Father is the starting point of all Creation.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 28th, 2022, 8:39 pm
by Sy Borg
Charlemagne wrote: October 28th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 10:37 pm
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 8:31 pm
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 5:26 pm

No, he doesn't throw us into hell. Where did you get that notion? We throw ourselves into hell, especially if we hate God so much and want nothing to do with him and offer God the ultimate insult of denying that he even exists.

Freud hated God, and he hated his own father, who it has been reported molested his children.

And I doubt that Freud had much use for Santa who is the modern celebration of a real-life character, Saint Nicholas of Causa.
I think you may need to tell the Bible that God does not send people to hell after they die:
"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8
"And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” - Matthew 25:46
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might 2 Thessalonians 1:9
50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. - Matthew 13:50

There's no need to hate God, because it probably does not exist in an objective sense. Yahweh of the Old Testament was indeed a despicable character, although so was Allah and Zeus. I dislike these characters of myth in much the same way as I disliked King Joffrey from Game of Thrones or Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars.

I love myths. Their characters do indeed live subjectively in the minds and emotions of many.

BTW, not sure what you are doing battle with Freud since the psychodynamic school of psychology fell out of favour some time ago. You can let the dead horse lie in peace.
I think you miss the point of all those quotes from the Bible you just gave. It's understandable because you clearly are not Christian and have no background in Christian theology. From the time of Adam and Eve on, Yahweh made contracts with the human race. The first contract was to obey just one commandment. Yahweh said to Adam and Eve:

"You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. From that tree you shall not eat; when you eat from it you shall die."

So they knew that if they disobeyed God, they would be condemning themselves to die. Actions have consequences. The same with the Ten Commandments. Again, St. Paul reminds sinners that their sins (freely chosen) will condemn them to spiritual death (hell).

Again, Jesus reminds us that when we freely choose to reject him, he will freely choose to reject us. Matthew 10:32-33

So you see going to hell (whatever hell is) is a freely chosen act, because we rejected the will of God, thinking our ego is bigger than his. God will not be mocked, and because he created us, we are free to choose to be forever glorified or forever damned. That is God's way. God makes the rules. We do not.
The whole ancient world was patriarchal and most of it still is except where the feminists rule. It's an ancient and universal instinct to understand that the male seed is required for procreation. That is the starting point, and without the male seed life cannot continue. That is why ancient pagan civilizations saw even their male gods as patriarchal, Zeus being the father of Athena, the most powerful of the female goddesses. The Jews were the only race to see through the stupidity of polytheism. But like all the pagan religions, Jews also could see that their God had to be Father of all, because Father is the starting point of all Creation.
Actually, I get my information from former theologians who became atheist, and they know far more than you about the scriptures, having studied it in a professional capacity for a long time.

Christians MUST own those quotes - and the other atrocities in the Bible - and not try to rationalise around them. That is what your holy book said. So, it is either unreliable as a source of history and morality, or Yahweh was an immature, petulant, narcissistic personality with vastly less wisdom than most human adults.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 29th, 2022, 6:02 am
by Belindi
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 10:37 pm
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 8:31 pm
Charlemagne wrote: October 27th, 2022, 5:26 pm
Sy Borg wrote: October 27th, 2022, 4:18 pm Not sure why you are babbling about dreaming. Further, pointing out patriarchal attitudes is not Freudian, it's just extremely obvious that God would be a male since Middle Eastern societies have long been notoriously patriarchal.

Further, God and Santa are similar in that they are wise old men who know more than usual mortal. They know if you have been naughty or if you have been nice, and they dole out gifts or punishments accordingly. God is basically a father for fathers, someone but he is on 365/7, including ... as you sleep. The patriarchal deity is always there watching, just waiting for a small mistake, for which it can throw the person into eternal hellfire where they will burn and writhe in agony for all time - because he loves us so much.
No, he doesn't throw us into hell. Where did you get that notion? We throw ourselves into hell, especially if we hate God so much and want nothing to do with him and offer God the ultimate insult of denying that he even exists.

Freud hated God, and he hated his own father, who it has been reported molested his children.

And I doubt that Freud had much use for Santa who is the modern celebration of a real-life character, Saint Nicholas of Causa.
I think you may need to tell the Bible that God does not send people to hell after they die:
"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8
"And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” - Matthew 25:46
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might 2 Thessalonians 1:9
50 and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. - Matthew 13:50

There's no need to hate God, because it probably does not exist in an objective sense. Yahweh of the Old Testament was indeed a despicable character, although so was Allah and Zeus. I dislike these characters of myth in much the same way as I disliked King Joffrey from Game of Thrones or Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars.

I love myths. Their characters do indeed live subjectively in the minds and emotions of many.

BTW, not sure what you are doing battle with Freud since the psychodynamic school of psychology fell out of favour some time ago. You can let the dead horse lie in peace.
I think you miss the point of all those quotes from the Bible you just gave. It's understandable because you clearly are not Christian and have no background in Christian theology. From the time of Adam and Eve on, Yahweh made contracts with the human race. The first contract was to obey just one commandment. Yahweh said to Adam and Eve:

"You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. From that tree you shall not eat; when you eat from it you shall die."

So they knew that if they disobeyed God, they would be condemning themselves to die. Actions have consequences. The same with the Ten Commandments. Again, St. Paul reminds sinners that their sins (freely chosen) will condemn them to spiritual death (hell).

Again, Jesus reminds us that when we freely choose to reject him, he will freely choose to reject us. Matthew 10:32-33

So you see going to hell (whatever hell is) is a freely chosen act, because we rejected the will of God, thinking our ego is bigger than his. God will not be mocked, and because he created us, we are free to choose to be forever glorified or forever damned. That is God's way. God makes the rules. We do not.
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is the tree that gives Adam freedom to make mistakes. While safely within the Garden Adam lacks the freedom to make mistakes, because God's province is all that is the case. God did not punish Adam for choosing to eat the apple however Adam must always live with the possibility that he has erred .

The interpretation of an important myth ignores any sequence in time. The expulsion from Eden is an allegory of the human condition.The Garden of Eden is an imaginary hypothesis that illuminates the alternative which is human responsibility.
Whoever put this myth at near the beginning of The Bible did well. The allegory of human existence illustrates a given about human existence which subsequent ideas in The Bible aim to make sense of and , in the life and work of Jesus, ameliorate.

Re: God is an Impossibility.

Posted: October 29th, 2022, 10:27 am
by EricPH
Sy Borg wrote: October 28th, 2022, 8:39 pm Actually, I get my information from former theologians who became atheist, and they know far more than you about the scriptures, having studied it in a professional capacity for a long time.
Anyone who has an opinion about God could be called a theologian. It is also said that theologians reveal more of their own nature than they do about God.
Christians MUST own those quotes - and the other atrocities in the Bible - and not try to rationalise around them. That is what your holy book said. So, it is either unreliable as a source of history and morality, or Yahweh was an immature, petulant, narcissistic personality with vastly less wisdom than most human adults.
I would never worship the God you describe. The greatest thing we should do is love God and our neighbours. We should even love and pray for our enemies. We should help the poor and oppressed.

We know how evil mankind can be, wars, murder, rape, theft. We are commanded not to do these things.