Philosophy Discussion Forums

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 2:47 am If God is omnipotent and omniscient then God takes all responsibility. The God myth posits that God knows everything can do anything, so all of the suffering of all sentient beings is as God planned.

Or maybe God is inclined to blame the cosmic version of Dominion for his shortfalls?

How so when humankind has admitted all responsibility?

God has got what he wants if humankind accepts all responsibility? God is justified.

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 1:19 pm God has got what he wants if humankind accepts all responsibility? God is justified.

Then he is a wanker. If God wasn't just the tragic fantasy of millions of gormless dupes, I'd say that he should take responsibility for his own messes, rather than blame his own shortfalls on the weak.

Belindi wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 4:32 am

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 2:47 am If God is omnipotent and omniscient then God takes all responsibility. The God myth posits that God knows everything can do anything, so all of the suffering of all sentient beings is as God planned.

Or maybe God is inclined to blame the cosmic version of Dominion for his shortfalls?

That argument is true of God as a person. Alternatively, God may be understood as an abstract concept of what the individual or the society takes to be the best quality that transcends time and place. The latter is an interpretation of God that can't be described in language or picture and any attempt to do so is idolatry.

God is a person according to Christians. I have no objection to the Spinozan God, which obviously has done nothing wrong. No, it is the anthropomorphised deities that should be exposed as the childish, loony fantasies that they are.

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 4:39 pm

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 1:19 pm God has got what he wants if humankind accepts all responsibility? God is justified.

Then he is a wanker. If God wasn't just the tragic fantasy of millions of gormless dupes, I'd say that he should take responsibility for his own messes, rather than blame his own shortfalls on the weak.

Does it matter what you think of God though? He has got you to admit that humankind is totally responsible and you admit it.

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 4:55 pm

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 4:39 pm

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 1:19 pm God has got what he wants if humankind accepts all responsibility? God is justified.

Then he is a wanker. If God wasn't just the tragic fantasy of millions of gormless dupes, I'd say that he should take responsibility for his own messes, rather than blame his own shortfalls on the weak.

Does it matter what you think of God though? He has got you to admit that humankind is totally responsible and you admit it.

He sounds like a certain politician who cannot accept his own flaws and always blames others.

Why do you think humans are to blame for the minor extinction events that occur every thirty million years? Why do you think humans are to blame for the five preceding major extinction events, starting with the Ordovician almost half a billion years ago?

Why do you treat a collection of Iron Age Middle Eastern knowledge as the last word in all things, and disregard all subsequent knowledge?

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 5:23 pm

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 4:55 pm

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 4:39 pm

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 1:19 pm God has got what he wants if humankind accepts all responsibility? God is justified.

Then he is a wanker. If God wasn't just the tragic fantasy of millions of gormless dupes, I'd say that he should take responsibility for his own messes, rather than blame his own shortfalls on the weak.

Does it matter what you think of God though? He has got you to admit that humankind is totally responsible and you admit it.

He sounds like a certain politician who cannot accept his own flaws and always blames others.

Why do you think humans are to blame for the minor extinction events that occur every thirty million years? Why do you think humans are to blame for the five preceding major extinction events, starting with the Ordovician almost half a billion years ago?

Why do you treat a collection of Iron Age Middle Eastern knowledge as the last word in all things, and disregard all subsequent knowledge?

What minor extinction events? There is no definitive proof for such timescales.Only guesswork.Evolutions have given up debating with creationists because they lose every debate.

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 5:52 pm

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 5:23 pm

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 4:55 pm

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 4:39 pm

Then he is a wanker. If God wasn't just the tragic fantasy of millions of gormless dupes, I'd say that he should take responsibility for his own messes, rather than blame his own shortfalls on the weak.

Does it matter what you think of God though? He has got you to admit that humankind is totally responsible and you admit it.

He sounds like a certain politician who cannot accept his own flaws and always blames others.

Why do you think humans are to blame for the minor extinction events that occur every thirty million years? Why do you think humans are to blame for the five preceding major extinction events, starting with the Ordovician almost half a billion years ago?

Why do you treat a collection of Iron Age Middle Eastern knowledge as the last word in all things, and disregard all subsequent knowledge?

What minor extinction events? There is no definitive proof for such timescales.Only guesswork. Evolutions have given up debating with creationists because they lose every debate.

List of extinction events https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extinction_events. If you won't bother listening to those who have done the study, then your opinions have no value.

Do you believe that Adam and Eve were modern humans

Do you believe that the world is flat?

Do you believe that the universe is 6,000 years old?

Again, why do you treat a collection of Iron Age Middle Eastern knowledge as the last word in all things, and disregard all subsequent knowledge?

Those who have done studies don’t have any definitive proof and are always influenced by their philosophy on life.I listen to both sides of the debate not just half.Creationism science is better science than evolutionary science,it just is,which is why evolutionary scientists lose every time in debates with creationists and are now refusing to debate with them because they are made to fools.Come on,I mean red blood cells and skin tissue found in/on many dinosaur bones and they’re meant to be millions of years old? Also,why should we listen to scientists who claimed it all started with a single Big Bang only a few to years ago when they are now discovering that the universe is not expanding uniformly which means the single Big Bang and Big Crunch is utter nonsense and proves that the gravity theory is as well.

I don’t believe the world is flat no.

It’s a fact that we all go back to only two people,possibly Adam and Eve.

The universe might have only been around for thousands of years It would certainly fit with actual evidence.i.e. Red blood cells and skin tissue found in/on many dinosaur bones.

I don’t dismiss any type of knowledge.I take it all on board.Why dismiss knowledge that could be important?

I don't dismiss knowledge either, but I do dismiss misinterpretations of ancient knowledge based on the idea that the ancients used language, or dealt with concepts, the same way as we do today.

You dismissed the overwhelming mountains of evidence that the universe is billions of years old - while making a big deal about not dismissing any knowledge. Oops. You point to dinosaur red blood cells being preserved as though it's a slam dunk for young Earth creationism without researching the known reasons why that particular tissue was preserved. Wrong again.

Seriously, do you actually really believe that Archbishop James Ussher adding all the ages of Biblical characters in the 17th century to equal 6,000 years is more credible than more than a century of serious scientific research?

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2023, 1:53 am I don't dismiss knowledge either, but I do dismiss misinterpretations of ancient knowledge based on the idea that the ancients used language, or dealt with concepts, the same way as we do today.

You dismissed the overwhelming mountains of evidence that the universe is billions of years old - while making a big deal about not dismissing any knowledge. Oops. You point to dinosaur red blood cells being preserved as though it's a slam dunk for young Earth creationism without researching the known reasons why that particular tissue was preserved. Wrong again.

Seriously, do you actually really believe that Archbishop James Ussher adding all the ages of Biblical characters in the 17th century to equal 6,000 years is more credible than more than a century of serious scientific research?

There is also better evidence,better science, that the universe is not billions of years old,not even millions of years old,and evolutionists have been made aware of it which is probably why they now refuse to debate with creationist.The red blood cells and skin tissue on dinosaur bones certainly rattled the evolutionists.They weren’t expecting that one.

I look at all evidences.

I suppose you accepted the single Big Bang theory as fact as well and yet that is proven nonsense.What experts are you referring to? These people aren’t experts.They guess and massage and manipulate data to suit their own agendas.

They can’t prove anything and their wild claims like the single Big Bang theory which is being proven as false by observation just goes to show how fake these supposed experts are.

Confused and Lost is a better description of them.

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 1:02 am What about the question.What has the devil done wrong? Why does God have to take the blame for everything?

The first cause, apparently, has a plan that we must all follow.

The devil, like all of us, are not allowed to deviate from that plan, so Yahweh gets all blame or praise for reality.

Place no name above Yahweh for anything, be it good or evil, and you break the first commandment.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2023, 12:00 pm

Joshua10 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 1:02 am What about the question.What has the devil done wrong? Why does God have to take the blame for everything?

The first cause, apparently, has a plan that we must all follow.

The devil, like all of us, are not allowed to deviate from that plan, so Yahweh gets all blame or praise for reality.

Place no name above Yahweh for anything, be it good or evil, and you break the first commandment.

Regards
DL

But we all agree that humankind has accepted full responsibility for the atrocities that have been committed throughout history. So God, if he exists, has got humankind to admit that it is responsible.

Humankind would need to accept that God exists if it wants to pass all the blame on to him.If humankind could do that then it would be totally blameless.

I would suggest that humankind might have a bit of a challenge on its hands.

I would suggest you are right humankind might need someone to offset all the blame on to and therefore might need God to exist to enable it to do that.

Sy Borg wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2023, 2:47 am If God is omnipotent and omniscient then God takes all responsibility. The God myth posits that God knows everything can do anything, so all of the suffering of all sentient beings is as God planned.

Or maybe God is inclined to blame the cosmic version of Dominion for his shortfalls?

How can you blame a God which you claim doesn’t exist?

What your philosophy is saying that you (along with all humankind) takes full responsibility for all the atrocities throughout history whilst at the same time REJECTING a God that might exist.

A God would need to exist before you can blame that God and that defeats the atheist’s objective.

From your logic you have to accept a God has done nothing wrong or accept that he exists.

It would appear that a God,that might exist is one step ahead of you.