Hypothetical question for my fellow atheists

[Czernobog]

The OP intrigues me, because it looks like he is beginning to doubt his belief that there is no God.

Like so many others you misunderstand my position. There is no God is not my belief. It is merely a premise. It is a negative premise that awaits objective evidence to falsify it.

Then I invite you to examine the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima. God proved his existence so overwhelmingly that there is no possibility to deny it.

Question. Since the whole world is illuminated by the same sun, how is it that this "miracle" was only visible in one place, by one group of people?

 

[Blackrook]

The OP intrigues me, because it looks like he is beginning to doubt his belief that there is no God.

Like so many others you misunderstand my position. There is no God is not my belief. It is merely a premise. It is a negative premise that awaits objective evidence to falsify it.

Then I invite you to examine the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima. God proved his existence so overwhelmingly that there is no possibility to deny it.

Question. Since the whole world is illuminated by the same sun, how is it that this "miracle" was only visible in one place, by one group of people?

Because the sun did not actually move. It was an image of the sun, visible to only some. Not everyone there saw it happen.

 

[Czernobog]

The OP intrigues me, because it looks like he is beginning to doubt his belief that there is no God.

Like so many others you misunderstand my position. There is no God is not my belief. It is merely a premise. It is a negative premise that awaits objective evidence to falsify it.

Then I invite you to examine the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima. God proved his existence so overwhelmingly that there is no possibility to deny it.

Question. Since the whole world is illuminated by the same sun, how is it that this "miracle" was only visible in one place, by one group of people?

Because the sun did not actually move. It was an image of the sun, visible to only some. Not everyone there saw it happen.

In other words there was no "miracle"; just an optical illusion. Not proof of anything.

 

[Blackrook]

The OP intrigues me, because it looks like he is beginning to doubt his belief that there is no God.

Like so many others you misunderstand my position. There is no God is not my belief. It is merely a premise. It is a negative premise that awaits objective evidence to falsify it.

Then I invite you to examine the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima. God proved his existence so overwhelmingly that there is no possibility to deny it.

Question. Since the whole world is illuminated by the same sun, how is it that this "miracle" was only visible in one place, by one group of people?

Because the sun did not actually move. It was an image of the sun, visible to only some. Not everyone there saw it happen.

In other words there was no "miracle"; just an optical illusion. Not proof of anything.

So you dismiss it without really looking into it. That's the typical atheist reaction, I thought you were different, but guess not.

 

[Two Thumbs]

then you will burn in hell for all eternity.

get it?

This is a hypothetical that god does exist, not if, the bible is true, not edited.

worship or hell


the choice is incredibly simple

No, it's a question of if god and jesus EXIST, not whether the manmade instruction manual is accurate. And if Jesus said it was, I would tell him that he is either lying or he is evil, and he could go fuck himself.

so you are choosing hell

ok, have fun with that.

Not at all. If Jesus laid out those conditions, I would believe he was lying. I simply would not believe that "the only true god" would be such an evil idiot.

the op made it clear that the bible is considered true.

you keep changing things so you can avoid hell.

like it or not, you have chosen eternal damnation.

link?

read the op

for fucks sake people, it's not that damn hard.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Idc

this is about, if you got proof that the Christ god is real, would you worship him.


clearly only a complete dunce wouldn't fall in line

I would not worship him. Why should I? And why would a god be so insecure as to demand he be worshipped? The entire concept is absurd.

then you will burn in hell for all eternity.

get it?

This is a hypothetical that god does exist, not if, the bible is true, not edited.

worship or hell


the choice is incredibly simple

So, your moral compass directs you to be a sycophant, in the hopes that God would be stupid enough to mistake it for sincerity, in the hopes of avoiding Hell. Yeah...I'd prefer to just be honest, and let the chips fall where they may.

there are no chips

you either follow and accept jesus as your savior, and get into heaven
or
burn forever


and really, god hasn't taken a direct roll in anything in over 2000 years.

So what? That's even worse. After demonstrating himself to be genocidal, he then just takes a poweder, and leaves us all to the whims of fate, when all along he could have chosen to make a difference.

You don't seem to get that if God is omniscient, he's gonna know that you're only saying the right words to avoid Hell. You think that's gonna cut it? Really??? You don't really think much of God, do you?

now you're making false assumptions to make false accusations.

weak
fucking
sauce


dismissed as a nutter

 

[Bonzi]

Unless it is moral for the Creator only

Then the Creaor is not moral. Why would you willingly look for, and worship a creator whose number one command is "Dos as I say, not as I do,"?

If the assumption that God is perfect it must follow

If God is not perfect then each individual gets to determine what morality is for his/herself

And that is the problem. How can a perfect creator create such an obviously flawed moral code, as one that starts , and ends with "Do as I say, not as I do,"?

Because God knows what is best for us. We are not equal to or with God. Think of it like a parent/child relationship

"Do as I say, not as I do" is not an indication of a person, or entity who "knows what is best for us". It is the last defence of a hypocrite barking out arbitrary rules that he knows are unreasonable, and even he himself does not follow.

I'm not a Biblical scholar, but, perhaps both of us are missing the true interpretation of the Bible and/or just have insufficient brains (compared to God) to truly comprehend His brand of justice and ethics.

If he were here, as in your OP, perhaps He could make it clear, or it would become clear. We just don't know, and, we have to admit to ourselves that we are NOT all knowing.... both in facts and eternal goodness

 

[cnm]

I think my position would have to be, "Okay. God exists...and he's a dick," and would accept whatever consequences taking that position would engender.

The only logical conclusion to your premise of conclusive evidence of the Christian god.

 

[cnm]

I will repeat, once more.

The theme of the op is that the Christian god and jesus are real


even though he keeps quoting the old testament, in violation of his own op.

The Christian god is YHWH, the god of the old testament.

 

[cnm]

Not everyone there saw it happen.

That certainly implies the evidence is not conclusive.

 

[cnm]

I'm not a Biblical scholar, but, perhaps both of us are missing the true interpretation of the Bible and/or just have insufficient brains (compared to God) to truly comprehend His brand of justice and ethics.

But the premise of god is the god of the bible, not some other interpretation of some other entity.

 

[Bonzi]

I'm not a Biblical scholar, but, perhaps both of us are missing the true interpretation of the Bible and/or just have insufficient brains (compared to God) to truly comprehend His brand of justice and ethics.

But the premise of god is the god of the bible, not some other interpretation of some other entity.

I mean that maybe we really don't understand the ways of the God of the Bible.
What we think it means and what is really means, may be 2 different things. Plus, there is a matter of whether it was accurately translated ... etc.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I will repeat, once more.

The theme of the op is that the Christian god and jesus are real


even though he keeps quoting the old testament, in violation of his own op.

The Christian god is YHWH, the god of the old testament.

they CLEARLY act very differently

 

[cnm]

they CLEARLY act very differently

I don't know about that, the theme of sacrifice of sons continues unabated.

 

[Czernobog]

Like so many others you misunderstand my position. There is no God is not my belief. It is merely a premise. It is a negative premise that awaits objective evidence to falsify it.

Then I invite you to examine the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima. God proved his existence so overwhelmingly that there is no possibility to deny it.

Question. Since the whole world is illuminated by the same sun, how is it that this "miracle" was only visible in one place, by one group of people?

Because the sun did not actually move. It was an image of the sun, visible to only some. Not everyone there saw it happen.

In other words there was no "miracle"; just an optical illusion. Not proof of anything.

So you dismiss it without really looking into it. That's the typical atheist reaction, I thought you were different, but guess not.

I did look into it. And your own admission is that the dancing sun is no different than a rainbow. There is nothing miraculous about a rainbow. It is nothing more than an optical illusion.

I mean, you can back this up, and begin with the appearance of the Virgin Mary". It's rather important to note that the "appearance" occurred with small children - impressionable, and highly imaginative. Tell me, do you remember the Salem Witch trials? It started much the same way. Young, impressionable, imaginative children all claiming to have had very similar circumstances. As the trials continued it became socially important to have "experienced" the terrors of the "Witch". Suggestibility, combined with peer pressure, and before long you have hysteria over witchcraft that wasn't happening. There are many cases in history of this same type of shared imagined experience.

As for the dancing sun, itself, it was nothing more than an optical illusion caused by thousands of people looking up at the sky, hoping, expecting, and even praying for some sign from God. It is of course dangerous to stare directly at the sun, and to avoid permanently damaging their eyesight, those at Fátima that day were looking up in the sky around the sun, which, if you do it long enough, can give the illusion of the sun moving as the eye muscles tire.

Sorry to disappoint. There are very few, if any, "miracles", outside of the Bible, which is highly suspect, that have ever happened throughout history, that do not have perfectly rational explanations. I'm sorry that I wasn't wowed by your dancing sun, but it really wasn't all that remarkable.

 

[Czernobog]

I would not worship him. Why should I? And why would a god be so insecure as to demand he be worshipped? The entire concept is absurd.

then you will burn in hell for all eternity.

get it?

This is a hypothetical that god does exist, not if, the bible is true, not edited.

worship or hell


the choice is incredibly simple

So, your moral compass directs you to be a sycophant, in the hopes that God would be stupid enough to mistake it for sincerity, in the hopes of avoiding Hell. Yeah...I'd prefer to just be honest, and let the chips fall where they may.

there are no chips

you either follow and accept jesus as your savior, and get into heaven
or
burn forever


and really, god hasn't taken a direct roll in anything in over 2000 years.

So what? That's even worse. After demonstrating himself to be genocidal, he then just takes a poweder, and leaves us all to the whims of fate, when all along he could have chosen to make a difference.

You don't seem to get that if God is omniscient, he's gonna know that you're only saying the right words to avoid Hell. You think that's gonna cut it? Really??? You don't really think much of God, do you?

now you're making false assumptions to make false accusations.

weak
fucking
sauce


dismissed as a nutter

Says the guy who insists that bowing down to a Genocidal God is rational. Thanx for stopping by. Buh bye.

 

[Czernobog]

Then the Creaor is not moral. Why would you willingly look for, and worship a creator whose number one command is "Dos as I say, not as I do,"?

If the assumption that God is perfect it must follow

If God is not perfect then each individual gets to determine what morality is for his/herself

And that is the problem. How can a perfect creator create such an obviously flawed moral code, as one that starts , and ends with "Do as I say, not as I do,"?

Because God knows what is best for us. We are not equal to or with God. Think of it like a parent/child relationship

"Do as I say, not as I do" is not an indication of a person, or entity who "knows what is best for us". It is the last defence of a hypocrite barking out arbitrary rules that he knows are unreasonable, and even he himself does not follow.

I'm not a Biblical scholar, but, perhaps both of us are missing the true interpretation of the Bible and/or just have insufficient brains (compared to God) to truly comprehend His brand of justice and ethics.

See, now your argument has been reduced to, "Well, it appears that you're right. There really isn't any rational explanation for such genocidal vi8olence, but I want to believe in, and worship this God, so I'm going to, anyway"

I mean, that's fine, if that works for you, but don't pretend that you God is a God of Love, and expect anyone capable of reason to buy into the propaganda.

If he were here, as in your OP, perhaps He could make it clear, or it would become clear. We just don't know, and, we have to admit to ourselves that we are NOT all knowing.... both in facts and eternal goodness

And would need to. That's my point. And it would need to be better than the "Job Response" - "Who do you think you are questioning me?!?!"

I'll tell you who I am! I am a guy who expects a Creator/God/Father to be consistent, rational, and just. I expect them to not by hypocrites. So,. you want me to bow down? Fine. Explain your genocidal nature, and reconcile that with the "God of Love and Inclusion" propaganda.

 

[Czernobog]

So, I've a hypothetical for you guys that I am curious about. I maintain that my atheism is a premise, not a conclusion. When I say, "God does not exist", I am presenting a falsifiable premise that is only awaiting objective, verifiable evidence.

Now, with that in mind, let us say that evidence is discovered tomorrow. Now only do we have absolute proof of the existence of God, but we even have absolute evidence that the Christian version of God exists. Could you just "fall in line"? Could you just "become" a Christian.

See, I don't think I could. If we suddenly had the objective evidence necessary to prove that the Christian God exists, that would mean that we, also, have to accept that the Bible is not just a book of stories, and is, in fact, an accurate record of the nature of that God. And that record indicates that he drown the entire race, as far as man understood it to be at that time. This God demanded his favourites to commit genocide...twice. This God chose one person, and intentionally made his life miserable, just for sport (a wager with Lucifer). In short, the Bible portrays a God that is a sociopath.

I don't know that, even with irrefutable evidence that the Christian God exists, that I could become a follower of that God.

I have always said that, given evidence,. I would change my position from atheism to one of theism. However, if I learned that the Christian God was the "God of Creation", I don't think that theism would be a respectful one. I think my position would have to be, "Okay. God exists...and he's a dick," and would accept whatever consequences taking that position would engender.

So, what about you guys? If we suddenly had evidence that Christians had it right all along, could you just become "Good Little Christians"?

So if you had absolute proof, that if you followed the teachings of jesus, got baptized and accepted him as your savior, that you would reside in heaven, for all eternity after death.

and that if you didn't, it's eternal hellfire.


you sir, are a complete idiot.

Maybe. But I will not bend a knee to a genocidal despot.

you are misusing the word genocide.


set your arm on fire

now imagine what that's going to feel like, all over, forever.

Then, imagine a mystical sky wizard is real, and a bronze age fairy tale is true. While you're at it, imagine 400 year old men, and healing touch, and zombie kings. Weeeeeee!

I will repeat, once more.

The theme of the op is that the Christian god and jesus are real


even though he keeps quoting the old testament, in violation of his own op.

That's because the Christian God is the God of the Old Testament. The modern Christian dogma seems to be to completely ignore the Old Testament, and they never crack their Bibles beyond Matthew. They just want to pretend that the Old Testament is irrelevant. The problem is that this line of reasoning ignores the writings of their own New Testament authors! Paul, in particular, also Peter, make specific references to the God of the Old Testament. Sorry, to pretend that the Old Testament has no relevance is dishonest, and absurd. The God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament.

 

[Czernobog]

I'm not a Biblical scholar, but, perhaps both of us are missing the true interpretation of the Bible and/or just have insufficient brains (compared to God) to truly comprehend His brand of justice and ethics.

But the premise of god is the god of the bible, not some other interpretation of some other entity.

I mean that maybe we really don't understand the ways of the God of the Bible.
What we think it means and what is really means, may be 2 different things. Plus, there is a matter of whether it was accurately translated ... etc.

So, now it is a matter of translation? So, what you're saying is that the second premise of the thought experiment is impossible. The bible can't ever be proven to be the accurate record of God, as the Bible is not accurate, and reliable. Then I would ask, why should anyone ever give any more credence to the Bible than they do to any other book of fairy tales, myths, and legends?

 

[hobelim]

I'm not a Biblical scholar, but, perhaps both of us are missing the true interpretation of the Bible and/or just have insufficient brains (compared to God) to truly comprehend His brand of justice and ethics.

But the premise of god is the god of the bible, not some other interpretation of some other entity.

I mean that maybe we really don't understand the ways of the God of the Bible.
What we think it means and what is really means, may be 2 different things. Plus, there is a matter of whether it was accurately translated ... etc.

Yes, and an example would be "I am a jealous God" .

The the original word has a meaning closer to "passionately devoted."