If there were a god, would we owe it anything?

[Complexity]

Suppose that there actually were a god. Would we owe it anything?

Would we owe it worship?
Would we owe it love?
Would we owe it obedience?

Suppose that there actually were a god.
Suppose that a god actually created the universe, including us.

Wouldn't it have done so for its own reasons, for its own pleasure?

Wouldn't that be its problem?

Would we owe it one moment of our attention?
Would we owe it anything at all?

I don't think so.

[El Greco]

If there were a god he'd probably have the best lawyers. So yes, we'd owe him a lot.

[Genesius]

If there were a god he'd probably have the best lawyers. So yes, we'd owe him a lot.

Nah, the lawyers would all be in Hell, so we could take Him for everything He's got!

:D

[Roboramma]

I don't think so.

Me neither. I think it would owe us an explanation, though.

edited to add an "owe" that made it to my head but not my fingers.

[T'ai Chi]

If god(s) created us, we might want to know if life is a gift or a loan.

[TimmyBerry]

I agree with Roboramma. It would owe us an explanation.
(Why didn't I get a pony for my 5th birthday, you bastard!?)

[slingblade]

Oh, it would owe me, so big. In fact, I'd end up owning the universe once my attorneys got done with the negligent, abusive bassturd.

[Correa Neto]

Suppose that there actually were a god. Would we owe it anything?

Would we owe it worship?
Would we owe it love?
Would we owe it obedience?

Suppose that there actually were a god.
Suppose that a god actually created the universe, including us.

Wouldn't it have done so for its own reasons, for its own pleasure?

Wouldn't that be its problem?

Would we owe it one moment of our attention?
Would we owe it anything at all?

I don't think so.

Assuming the God from the mainstream religions is a tyrannical genocidal attention whore...

Its answer would be yes...

[meg]

Well, assuming that god is kind of like a parent or something, and assuming we weren't too damaged by growing up with a mother like that.. I guess we would owe her a phone call now and then, maybe send some pictures of the kids once in a while. Put her into a nursing home once she gets feeble and starts falling down alot. Stuff like that.

[Complexity]

Assuming the God from the mainstream religions is a tyrannical genocidal attention whore...

Its answer would be yes...
The question isn't whether it would think we owe it something, but whether we actually would owe it anything.

I wouldn't give a damn over what it would think. It would have no claim on me.

Methinks that the phrasing of your assumption is at odds with your conclusion.

[Serenity]

I'll address your question of worship.
If there were a god I don't think we should worship it.

I’ve never liked the notion of worshiping. It’s a word you see often on churches, displaying times of worship. Why would a god have any need for it? Any god-like entity (should it exist) worthy of respect, is one that doesn’t seek idolization. Isn’t that what religions are doing… idolizing some mysterious force in the sky they don’t fully understand in accordance with some incomplete ancient scriptures or manuscripts written by man?

There’s a better way. If you feel the need to believe in god (I personally don’t), think of him like you would a parent. A parent’s role is one of raising and nurturing children to be independent and learn to think for themselves. A parent should seek to instill in them the hopes and aspirations of a life better than their own. You want them to be “better” than you, and to one day do the same for those they love or care about. If you must believe, don’t lower yourself to behave like its slave, instead, act like its progeny, to one day be its equal or successor. I shudder to think if my parents were told I’d build them monuments or houses of worship in their name. They’d want remembrance, and nothing more.

[Iacchus]

Suppose that there actually were a god. Would we owe it anything?

Would we owe it worship?
Would we owe it love?
Would we owe it obedience? ...

Would we owe it one moment of our attention?The Universe sure is a place of wonder and awe isn't it?

[Iacchus]

Oh, it would owe me, so big. In fact, I'd end up owning the universe once my attorneys got done with the negligent, abusive bassturd.Contingent upon the fact that He even exists of course.

[Orangutango]

[Suspending Disbelief]

My answer would hinge directly upon exactly what type of "god" we're
talking about here, and whether or not it had successfully communicated
to us mere mortals exactly what it expects from us.

If we're talking about the Judeo-Christian version of the all-mighty...
you know, the one who supposedly dictated to his disciples that wrote
the bible his mandates as to what we "owe" him (following his every
commandment willingly and unquestionably) and who then goes on to spell
out in detail the consequences of our failing to acquiesce to his every
edict (eternal damnation)... then I suppose my honest answer would have
to be... no.

Even if there were indisputable evidence that such a being actually
existed, I personally don't respond well to what basically comes down
to thinly-veiled threats: i.e. Worship me or suffer eternally. Any
"loving" and "benign" god that needs to make his creations jump through
a laundry list of theological hoops every, single day of their
oh-too-brief lives... to genuflect (i.e. grovel) at his feet while he
dangles the proverbial carrot of paradise in front of our faces is not
the sort of deity that would earn my undying love and devotion.

I, for one, am just stubborn enough to risk being cast down into
whatever hell he has in store for me, rather than live my life in
constant fear of somehow accidently or unknowingly earning his divine
wrath over some slight to his omnipresent ego. I wouldn't even bother
pretending to worship him just for the sake of hopefully getting
to go to that wonderful, fun-filled celestial Disney Land in the sky...
what's the point, if our all-knowing creator knows that I'm only paying
him lip-service anyway (much like a good portion of self-styled
religious people I know)...?

Now, if we're talking about a god who basically set the universe in
motion before saying: "Have fun, you bunch of silly hairless apes...
I'll be seeing you again after your return ticket is punched...", then
stepping back and letting reality get on with it's business... then I
can see myself having no problem whatsoever throwing out the
occassional "Thanks, god, for allowing a couple trillion atoms to
coalesce into this adorable, little body of mine.":)

[/Suspending Disbelief]

Jen

[Complexity]

Orangutango - within the context of [suspending disbelief], I agree with you, especially about that [/suspending disbelief] adorable, little body of yours.

[Jeremy]

Assuming that a God exists, try to think about it from his perspective.

We would be to him as virtual computer programs are to us. Anyone who has ever played a game where you are regent over a virtual entity with artificial intelligence (The Sims, Black and White, etc.) has at one point or another purposely neglected, tortured, or killed their charges. You did not feel wrong about it, nor did you feel the need to apologize or explain yourself to the virtual beings. To you, they are not real.

But what is the world, if not an extremely complex program? Our emotions and suffering are simply chemicals, no more or less significant than the electrical signals which signaled distress in the computer simulations. I can't imagine why a God would think of us differently.

A large error in trying to say that God "hates me and is mean" is ascribing human emotions to a being that is, by definition, higher.

To answer the question, I would worship a God, were he to reveal himself to me, if it ensured some kind of reward, or reprieve from punishment.

[Complexity]

Sorry, Jeremy, but I've got to disagree...

I try to do what I think is right, regardless of the possibility of reward or punishment, especially those promised or threatened by a puling pissant of a god.

No one has yet been 'regent over a virtual entity with artificial intelligence'. Don't confuse that with playing silly games.

You can have these 'higher' beings - I'll stick with some good people and some good books, any day.

[Orangutango]

Orangutango - within the context of [suspending disbelief], I agree with you, especially about that [/suspending disbelief] adorable, little body of yours.

You sweet talker, Betty Crocker...:blush:

Hugs:)

[Skeptical Greg]

What kind of God, worth it's salt, isn't getting the worship it deserves?
And whose fault is that ?

[Orangutango]

Hey, Jeremy:)

Assuming that a God exists, try to think about it from his perspective.

In order to adress this statement properly, I would need to know which version of god you are refering to. For now, I will go with the assumption that your are speaking of the Judeo-Christian god of the bible.

We would be to him as virtual computer programs are to us. Anyone who has ever played a game where you are regent over a virtual entity with artificial intelligence (The Sims, Black and White, etc.) has at one point or another purposely neglected, tortured, or killed their charges. You did not feel wrong about it, nor did you feel the need to apologize or explain yourself to the virtual beings. To you, they are not real.

I think the problem I have with this analogy is that unlike one of us playing a simulation game where we have no real vested interest in what ultimately happens to the characters on our computer screens (well... unless we're talking about that level 60 Wizard in Everquest that took you over 300 hours of non-stop playing to get), god (assuming for the moment that he is real) has given us his "rule book" (i.e. the bible) for what we humans call the ultimate game of "Life". In this rule book (again, assuming it is factually correct), the creator of this game has stated that he does indeed care for his "game pieces" (i.e. humanity), and only has our best interests at heart in regards to "winning the game" (i.e. joining him in heaven).

Unlike ourselves playing a video game, god has a definite, vested interest in his creations (i.e. desiring them to worship him) to the point that he has made it crystal-clear that the penalty for not playing his game by following the guidelines set forth in his rule book is far, far more terrible than just "Game Over"... we're talking about an eternity in "Jail" (i.e. hell) with no "Get out of Jail free" cards to be had.

But what is the world, if not an extremely complex program? Our emotions and suffering are simply chemicals, no more or less significant than the electrical signals which signaled distress in the computer simulations. I can't imagine why a God would think of us differently.

Because the god we are refering to has stated that he thinks of us differently... we are all his "children", which at the very least denotes the fact that he cares for us somewhat like an absentee parent.

A large error in trying to say that God "hates me and is mean" is ascribing human emotions to a being that is, by definition, higher.

Speaking only for myself... I've never thought that if there really is a god, that he is a big meanie whose sole purpose is to make my life miserable. I believe that it is better said that the Judeo-Christian/Muslim versions of god is a petty, little whiner that thows a temper-tantrum every time one of his precious play-things (us) decides to use their free will and <snicker> god-given brain to deduce that he, in fact, doesn't exist.:)

To answer the question, I would worship a God, were he to reveal himself to me, if it ensured some kind of reward, or reprieve from punishment.

As for myself, a god that has to offer me a bribe or, conversely, a threat in order to get me to worship him instead of wanting me to love him back solely based on knowing that his love for all humanity is unconditional is not a god worth believing in, let alone worshiping...

[Soapy Sam]

Let's cut to the chase here.

If the alternative was spending the next trillion years up to your ears in molten lava, would you worship him?

Call me gutless and pass the incense.

[Carn]

Assuming the God from the mainstream religions is a tyrannical genocidal attention whore...

Its answer would be yes...

I agree in that case we would owe him something.

We would just first spend a lot of time worshipping and fooling him, we are obident, until science has advanced enough.
Then we would give him, what we owe him - he should run realy fast, so he doesn't get it.

Maybe we could first organize a fair trial, though god should be capable to defend himself - maybe he realy would have a good explanation.

But i cannot imagine any excuse from an allpowerful being to explain away the pain in this world.

Carn

[Roboramma]

Let's cut to the chase here.

If the alternative was spending the next trillion years up to your ears in molten lava, would you worship him?

Call me gutless and pass the incense.
Here you are. Do you have any bandages I could borrow for my knees?

[Carn]

Assuming that a God exists, try to think about it from his perspective.

We would be to him as virtual computer programs are to us. Anyone who has ever played a game where you are regent over a virtual entity with artificial intelligence (The Sims, Black and White, etc.) has at one point or another purposely neglected, tortured, or killed their charges. You did not feel wrong about it, nor did you feel the need to apologize or explain yourself to the virtual beings. To you, they are not real.

But what is the world, if not an extremely complex program? Our emotions and suffering are simply chemicals, no more or less significant than the electrical signals which signaled distress in the computer simulations. I can't imagine why a God would think of us differently.

A large error in trying to say that God "hates me and is mean" is ascribing human emotions to a being that is, by definition, higher.



If i ever come among a computer game, where intelligent beings(pass the turing test at least) are, it would no longer be a game for me.
It could be that i would take interest in their intelligence and development and observe, how they develop without me messing around directly with their code.
But that would leave them in their enviroment to themselve, i would not actively torture them, so they worship me, nor would i create a hell or something like that.

At worst i would implement a few with special preaching subroutines, so i could study how a madness like religion spreads, but i would stop religions before they do serious harm.

Carn

[Orangutango]

If i ever come among a computer game, where intelligent beings(pass the turing test at least) are, it would no longer be a game for me.
It could be that i would take interest in their intelligence and development and observe, how they develop without me messing around directly with their code.
But that would leave them in their enviroment to themselve, i would not actively torture them, so they worship me, nor would i create a hell or something like that.

At worst i would implement a few with special preaching subroutines, so i could study how a madness like religion spreads, but i would stop religions before they do serious harm.

Carn

I'd vote for you to be my god.:)

[Beleth]

A large error in trying to say that God "hates me and is mean" is ascribing human emotions to a being that is, by definition, higher. How is that an error?

Some of the things God does through nature cause us to suffer, whether we are like computer programs or not.

If computer programs suffered when they were exited out of, would we be so cavalier about exiting out of them?

[Meadmaker]

One perspective on the question comes from Buddhist teachings.

Buddhism teaches that if there is a God, the desires of such a being would be utterly incomprehensible to us, because a finite mind cannot understand an infinite being. Therefore, there isn't much point in worshipping such a being, because we could not possibly know if such worship would be well received or not.

[Iacchus]

Maybe God just wants us to be happy?

[Belz...]

Wouldn't that be its problem?

Would we owe it one moment of our attention?
Would we owe it anything at all?

I don't think so.

I agree. Even IF Gunderscored existed and IF he wasn't such a lame, murderous bastard, we wouldn't owe him anything. We didn't ask to be created and we certainly didn't ask for him to give us a road map to life.

IF he DID exist and someone wants to have a "relationship" with him, fine. But no one should be held to that.

[Belz...]

The Universe sure is a place of wonder and awe isn't it?

As usual, random sentences thrown in just to confuse the hell outta people. Thank Iacchus.

[Serenity]

Let's cut to the chase here.

If the alternative was spending the next trillion years up to your ears in molten lava, would you worship him?

Call me gutless and pass the incense.I’m right there with you Soapy Sam; need a light? :D

I was going to say something similar to CARN’s statement that sentient life that is conceptually intelligent enough to explore beyond its environment and further more exercises a sense of morality and ethics might be worthy of redemption or some degree of respect in the mind of a higher intelligence.

If a super intelligent being was responsible for our creation and showed no signs of malevolence toward us, it is certainly worthy of our respect, not worship. Maybe even love depending on the circumstances. What if a god seeded and set the prospect for life in motion… not realizing life took hold here on Earth… millenniums later we’re reunited with a surprised creator enraptured by our emergence that loves us? We certainly wouldn’t owe it blind obedience, but obedience it may get if it is deserving of our respect and gratitude and has nothing but good intentions. I'll leave my judgment open, however unlikely the occurrence.

[Belz...]

Maybe God just wants us to be happy?

He's doing a p*ss-poor job of it.

[Iacchus]

He's doing a p*ss-poor job of it.Maybe it all has to do with potential? You know, like a plant that has the potential to grow into a tree?

[Iacchus]

As usual, random sentences thrown in just to confuse the hell outta people. Thank Iacchus.Actually, this is more in line with something Einstein said, equating his awe and wonder of the Universe with the worship of God. And I wholeheartedly concur.

[Belz...]

Maybe it all has to do with potential? You know, like a plant that has the potential to grow into a tree?

A bent, ugly tree.

Actually, this is more in line with something Einstein said, equating his awe and wonder of the Universe with the worship of God. And I wholeheartedly concur.

That's not what he said or meant, Iacchus.

[Jeremy]

Complexity, thank you for responding to my first real post on this board.

Sorry, Jeremy, but I've got to disagree...

I try to do what I think is right, regardless of the possibility of reward or punishment, especially those promised or threatened by a puling pissant of a god.

What do you base your concept of right upon? The hypothetical God you profess to hate? A belief in some universal morality that transcends God?

No one has yet been 'regent over a virtual entity with artificial intelligence'. Don't confuse that with playing silly games.

I see no real difference, except in magnitude of complexity. Is there some kind of magical line that differentiates their electrical suffering from our chemical pains?

Assume that there was a computer powerful enough to simulate all the laws of physics and matter, to the point that it could render the human mind from the physical neurons. Would you feel a responsibility for this creation? Would you owe it anything? What if you were to put it to practical use in scientific testing that would cause pain to the highly advanced artificial being, would this be wrong?

***

Orangutango, I was going more for a generic, deistic, creator type God, not the Judeo-Christian Yahweh. But, even so, would you feel wrong deceiving a computer program? Perhaps you decided to start out the game as a benevolent provider, and then got frustrated to the point that you impulsively burnt your worshipers to a crisp.

***

Beleth,

How is that an error?

It is an error because it is trying to apply our care about humans, to a being that would not share the same connection. As I said, his care for us would be analogous to our care for a computer program.

Some of the things God does through nature cause us to suffer, whether we are like computer programs or not.
Yes, things may cause us to suffer, but what would are suffering be to a God?

If computer programs suffered when they were exited out of, would we be so cavalier about exiting out of them?
I don't see why not. The computer program is not capable of getting back at me, and has no memory of my behavior. (To be nit-picky, most AI are not programmed to avoid being shut off. Their worries tend to be more along the lines of simulated hunger.)

[wunky]

having been raised in a strict italian catholic family I have been schooled to believe that I would owe "him" something. but over time I have lost faith in what I was taught I was supposed to believe
Would we owe it worship?- no
Would we owe it love?- no
Would we owe it obedience?-no
Suppose that there actually were a god.
Suppose that a god actually created the universe, including us.
Wouldn't it have done so for its own reasons, for its own pleasure?
That is my thinking now.
Wouldn't that be its problem? Yes, I think so.
Would we owe it one moment of our attention?- no
Would we owe it anything at all?- no

[Complexity]

Complexity, thank you for responding to my first real post on this board.
You're most welcome. I'm glad to see you here, dealing with some serious questions.

What do you base your concept of right upon? The hypothetical God you profess to hate? A belief in some universal morality that transcends God?
I spent years looking for a foundation for ethics and morals. I finally realized that there isn't one.

I decide what is right and wrong the only way I can - by trying to be honest about who I am and the path by which I got here, by thinking, by learning, by picking what seems the best to me and rejecting the rest.

I make my own ethics and morality to the best of my ability.

I can't hate a hypothetical god. I can hate some of the bastards that use ideas like 'religion' and 'god' do blight the lives of others.

I don't believe that there is any universal morality.

I see no real difference, except in magnitude of complexity. Is there some kind of magical line that differentiates their electrical suffering from our chemical pains?
I very much agree with you that it is a matter of degree. I would have a full measure of respect for an artificial intelligence, should I live to encounter one. The implementation (e.g. biological, electronic) doesn't matter. The architecture doesn't matter.

All that matters is whether a consciousness emerges. I think we are very far from that. I know that several game makers bandy about the term 'artificial intelligence', but they aren't close. No one is, yet.

Assume that there was a computer powerful enough to simulate all the laws of physics and matter, to the point that it could render the human mind from the physical neurons. Would you feel a responsibility for this creation? Would you owe it anything? What if you were to put it to practical use in scientific testing that would cause pain to the highly advanced artificial being, would this be wrong?

Absolutely, I would. I would owe it more than I would a human child that I sired. I would regard 'putting it to practical use' to be slavery.

Welcome once more to active posting!

[Orangutango]

Orangutango, I was going more for a generic, deistic, creator type God, not the Judeo-Christian Yahweh. But, even so, would you feel wrong deceiving a computer program? Perhaps you decided to start out the game as a benevolent provider, and then got frustrated to the point that you impulsively burnt your worshipers to a crisp.


Gotcha... but just to stay in continuity in order to answer your question, I'll stick with the popular conception of god (Judeo-Christian version).

In order to make the analogy between my purposefully mistreating a computer-generated "individual" and god purposefully mistreating a flesh-and-blood individual, we need to look at what exactly the "worshiper" in both situations has to go on in terms of what they believe their respective "god" expects of them.

In the 1st example, does the computerized worshiper have access to a rule book that states what it's god (me) is like? What my expectations are for my little, virtual flock? What to expect in terms of what rewards or punishments I can be expected to dole out, and for what reasons? Unless the answers to these questions were added to the program (in other words... giving them the virtual equivalent of the bible), then I could not be charged with deceiving or destroying them, due to the fact that I had never given them the false hope that I would not do so.

In regards to the 2nd example, the god of the bible does indeed provide answers to each of the questions mentioned above. In a nutshell... this god supposedly has only our best interests at heart (salvation, joining him in heaven, etc...), and should he act contrary to what he has lead us to believe about his motives (or had outright lied to us), then he would indeed be guilty of deceiving us.

Welcome to the boards.:)

[Beleth]

It is an error because it is trying to apply our care about humans, to a being that would not share the same connection. As I said, his care for us would be analogous to our care for a computer program.Does that make the suffering any less real?

Yes, things may cause us to suffer, but what would are suffering be to a God? It depends on whether the God knows it is causing suffering or not.

If it knows, then it's evil.
If it doesn't know, then it's stupid.

I don't see why not. The computer program is not capable of getting back at me, and has no memory of my behavior. (To be nit-picky, most AI are not programmed to avoid being shut off. Their worries tend to be more along the lines of simulated hunger.) So it's all right to be cruel to something as long as it can't get back at you?
Do you know what a "bully" is, Jeremy?

[Jeremy]

So it's all right to be cruel to something as long as it can't get back at you?
Do you know what a "bully" is, Jeremy?
Beleth, do you know what the basis for morality is?

Self interest is the basis for all human actions, including morality. If you are going to deny the existence of god and realize the natural causation of the world, then why stop short and fail to disregard the lie of universal morality, and the realization that everything is natural. Good and Evil are human creations, rooted in either genes or memes, and are not universally applicable.

[Ducky]

If there was a God I'd probably owe it a hundred bucks.









...cause I owe lots of people a hundred bucks.

[Ducky]

Maybe God just wants us to be happy?


Wants me to be happy by giving me cancer?



Riiiiiight.










Whatever.

[Hazen]

Let's cut to the chase here.

If the alternative was spending the next trillion years up to your ears in molten lava, would you worship him?

Call me gutless and pass the incense.

I don't see what harm molten lava will do if you don't have a body.

[Roboramma]

Beleth, do you know what the basis for morality is?

Self interest is the basis for all human actions, including morality.

Only in a very limited and basically meaningless sense.

If you are going to deny the existence of god and realize the natural causation of the world, then why stop short and fail to disregard the lie of universal morality, and the realization that everything is natural.
I don't find it hypocritical to say something is wrong, even if I do admit that everything is natural. Please explain the contradiction.

Good and Evil are human creations, rooted in either genes or memes, and are not universally applicable.
Not necessarily. Suffering is a part of nature. What is it? All it really is is a specific type of interaction amoung neurons. That doesn't make it any less unpleasant.
Any creature that is suffering will necessarily define it's suffering as a bad thing. That's sort of what suffering is. So it can be considered bad with or without humans.
I'm not really sure where this point is leading me, only that I don't think that saying that Stalin was only bad by one arbitrary definition (even if it is a definition rooted in our genes) is meaningful. But maybe that's just me.

[Rufo]

Wants me to be happy by giving me cancer?
Wants to make you happy by creating you, perhaps?

That is something I just don't get. Let's say there is a God and God created everything. From how lots of you seem to react to this idea, it seems you would rather not have existed at all. Because that is the only legitimate reason to dispise God. If anyone thinks they've gone through so much suffering in their life that they wish they had never existed, or, for the more empathic, if they think the majority of the people who ever lived felt like that - fine, they can go ahead and hate God.

Sure, let's say all suffering you've gone through is from God. Then surely all happiness must be from God too. But, oh no, let's not think like that, or we might start sounding like woos! Let's show how scepticism gives a meaningful life and an optimistic view of the world by pointing out how all the bad things are so much more characteristic for our lives than the good ones.

I'm not saying that we should all fall down and workship God. After all, we know nothing about it, not even if it exists. But this view of God as evil, evil, EVIL just seems a bit ridiculous.

[Orangutango]

Speaking only for myself... I don't think I've ever called god (in whatever incarnation people think of it as) as being evil, in the classical sense.

Petty? Yes. Vindicive? You bet. Co-dependent? Absopositivolutely.

Just the simple fact that god has gone to the trouble of creating a thoroughly unpleasant, little place called hell to cast those of us imperfect and perfectly fallible mortals into for all of eternity for having the absolute gall to use our <cough, cough> god-given brains to even question his existance...?

And don't even get me started why a supposedly omnipotent and omniscient deity's happiness hinges upon whether or not us hairless apes worship him...

It's a good thing he doesn't really exist, or I would be in a heap-o'-trouble, wouldn't I...?:)

[Complexity]

People don't design gods very well.

[Beleth]

Beleth, do you know what the basis for morality is?I know what makes the most sense...

Self interest is the basis for all human actions, including morality. ... and that outdated notion ain't it.

[Jeremy]

I know what makes the most sense... and that outdated notion ain't it.

Then please tell me, oh great enlightened one.

[Ducky]

Wants to make you happy by creating you, perhaps?

That is something I just don't get. Let's say there is a God and God created everything. From how lots of you seem to react to this idea, it seems you would rather not have existed at all. Because that is the only legitimate reason to dispise God. If anyone thinks they've gone through so much suffering in their life that they wish they had never existed, or, for the more empathic, if they think the majority of the people who ever lived felt like that - fine, they can go ahead and hate God.

Sure, let's say all suffering you've gone through is from God. Then surely all happiness must be from God too. But, oh no, let's not think like that, or we might start sounding like woos! Let's show how scepticism gives a meaningful life and an optimistic view of the world by pointing out how all the bad things are so much more characteristic for our lives than the good ones.

I'm not saying that we should all fall down and workship God. After all, we know nothing about it, not even if it exists. But this view of God as evil, evil, EVIL just seems a bit ridiculous.



To be overly specific, I was "created" when my father got a bit randy on a family trip. Unless you posit your God was actually helping the old man thrust in and out of my mother, he didn't "create" me. I was born of two humans mating.

I don't despise something that doesn't exist, so peddle your strawman elsewhere.

However, your saying I should be grateful to have been created by God without acknowledging that the same God that created me also created cancer, and therefore is responsible for my suffering is simply disingenuous.

Your arguments are the same old tired crap apologetics have thrown at me for years. It breaks down to these choices:

1) God is all knowing and all powerful.
2) God is not all powerful and/or all knowing.
3) God does not exist and was an idea created out of man's need to explain the world around him due to lack of understanding.

I pick 3, you seem to pick 1.

So what justifacation does the creator have for creating something and then making it suffer?

[Carn]

Wants to make you happy by creating you, perhaps?

That is something I just don't get. Let's say there is a God and God created everything. From how lots of you seem to react to this idea, it seems you would rather not have existed at all. Because that is the only legitimate reason to dispise God. If anyone thinks they've gone through so much suffering in their life that they wish they had never existed, or, for the more empathic, if they think the majority of the people who ever lived felt like that - fine, they can go ahead and hate God.

Sure, let's say all suffering you've gone through is from God. Then surely all happiness must be from God too. But, oh no, let's not think like that, or we might start sounding like woos! Let's show how scepticism gives a meaningful life and an optimistic view of the world by pointing out how all the bad things are so much more characteristic for our lives than the good ones.

I'm not saying that we should all fall down and workship God. After all, we know nothing about it, not even if it exists. But this view of God as evil, evil, EVIL just seems a bit ridiculous.


Just a hint, maybe for fowlsound the bad things are far more characteristic for his life, than the good things.
Then it is just logical to ask, when talking about a allknowing, allpowerful and caring god, what all this pain in his life was for.
And i do not think a allknowing, allpowerful and caring being could give a logically consistent answer to that question.

Carn

[RandFan]

...they can go ahead and hate God.

But this view of God as evil, evil, EVIL just seems a bit ridiculous.No, I don't see the notion of god as evil. Just ridiculous, illogical and silly.

BTW, I hate god as much as I hate leprechauns and Santa Claus, oh and flying Reindeer with their reindeer games. Pricks.

[Humphreys]

Because that is the only legitimate reason to dispise God.

What about the whole punishing unbelievers for all eternity bit? That kinda thing can really put a crimp on your day.