Blame it on God!

It's fair to postulate what our situation would be given different starting assumptions.

That's not a matter of blame, and the issue being explored is what is God like.

Yes, there are times when our law does conflict with the religious desires of some.

There are reasons that polygamy isn't legal. In fact, the primary religious organization that once supported that idea has also found it to be problematic and has banned it. So, what's left of support for polygamy by religion is a small isolated community that as far as I know is not getting serious pressure over it.

There are also limits on noise (such as loudly broadcasted calls to prayer), on conducting services in residential neighborhoods, etc.

Yes, you really don't have anything other than the Mormons to argue about.

Far more importantly, Arizona passed a law that said that anybody could ignore broad sections of law if it disagreed with their personal religion.

Of course, there is no possibility of government weighing what is religion and what is NOT religion, so it really meant that large sections of law would simply be trashed.

We really DO need to have a government. And, there is NO possibility that every individual will be happy with every aspect of that government, no matter what is chosen.

 

Blaming God is kvetching. I try to deal with life. As for blame, I blame myself because it's always either my own choice or action, or my own improper reaction to something which winds up bringing me turmoil. In God though, I do trust.

I don't know if I believe those who say they don't blame God because, say they, there is no God to blame. For all I know, that's a fascade, behind which they cry and/or fume. I suspect this because if you bring up trust/faith in or anything positive about God, they will point to the worlds ills and ask, where is God. That they cannot see the absence of sorrow, and only see a cause to disbelieve.... It suggests to me that it is leverage to banish the concept in deference their own inner wounds and prideful oaths.

So for them to say there is no God is to voice a somewhat magical incantation and close themselves off. This of course is followed by the smug demand for tangible proof, which is like asking for proof of conscience when it is inherent in the civilization and society we build around the values we pluck from it and lift up as standards, and around which we spin. Must God be seen to be?

 

You and atheists agree that blaming ills on god is no better than kvetching.

The question of whether there is a god is a different issue than what is discussed here, I think.

This is the religion section and divisions of Christianity don't agree on every characteristics of god being discussed.

Christian theologians through the ages have discussed what these various characteristics would imply, and they certainly do not all agree.

So, let's NOT confuse this discussion with "blaming god".

Kokomo, Roanoke, do you agree?

 

It doesn't. The question is very simple; If God is to be given credit for good things happening, why shouldn't he be also given blame for bad things happening (especially given a lot of the things in question aren't entirely good or entirely bad or are good for some people but bad for others)?

 

you are asking me to rationalize that to which is not rational in the first place! ie that your pond to play in.

I simply pointed out: even if they were omnipotent and omniscient how does that make them responsible for your convenience? (or for that matter inconvenience?)

 

You are getting close to proposing that God's decisions are irrelevant - that they just don't matter to us.

I don't know anyone interested in "blaming god".

But, it is interesting to contemplate in what ways his decisions and capabilities would matter to humans.

 

Maybe if you are creating your own G/god

Because they dont agree on fine points of God how does that make God responsible for everything including your actions as a result of your free will and all the stupid mistakes people make throughout life?

Thats that title of the thread, sounds like maybe you are confused?

 

Its used as a justification for not believing in God in nearly every thread I have every seen out here on the subject.

Which atheist admits that atheology and its associated religion oft times include God in their moral compass?

 

I really do not believe many individuals choose their religious beliefs by guessing how omniscience or omnipotence of a god would actually affect our lives.

Plus, Christian theologians discuss these issues - not even Christians have a singular view on all these issues. And, Christians are happy with various different beliefs.

As for your last, this thread has nothing to do with how people form their own moral compass, obviously.

 

It isn't an argument against any omnipotent and omniscient God. Just against one who doesn't wish nasty things like hurricanes, cancer, etc to exist. A God who likes these things remains coherent.

 

If the creators of the airplane were omnipotent and omniscient (and immortal) then they would indeed be responsible for all that was later done with the airplane. If they created it knowing what it would lead to and then opted not to prevent it from happening after they created it, then they are responsible. And no, that does not mean others who use it are not also responsible.

Whether it's good or bad is a separate question. This is a thing about omnipotence. It means you can do anything and have everything as you want it.

That cancer exists, means any omnipotent omniscient being intends it to exist. If wanted it not to, then it wouldn't. Other people's convenience is irrelevant to that.

 

I'm not asking you to do anything, I'm just answering the question in the OP, explaining why some people might say the things it referred to.

 

I blame god for this thread.

/thread

 

Gotta hand it to ya for posting some of the stupidest arguments on the board!

In the greater scheme of things cancer has as much a right to live as you do.

Yes! Thats exactly the way cancer looks at it!

YES!
and steel because steel makes knifes, guns, airplanes
and horses because people fought war using horses
and fish because people got bones stuck in their throat and died
and you because after all look at all the living things you murder every day so you can live
Lets face it, its all Gods fault for creating radiation from the sun and molecules and atoms!
God should have been thinking and considered all the damn problems he was creating by creating so much inconvenience for the bird!

 

clearly this thread has demonstrated there are people that do just that.

Clearly an omniscient / omnipotent God would have thought about how humans kill each other before he created the most destructive force on the planet.

One good thing though, God created neoatheists! Thankfully neoatheists at least the liberal ones, are here to save us and lead the way to true spiritual enlightenment!

 

Yes, hence the wording "supposedly".

It avoids blaming something that they don't believe exists, because religious people definitely exist.

Not really, they're two different arguments.

One argument is to blame religious people for things done by religious people in God's name. The other argument is a reductio ad absurdum based on the idea that God is responsible for that which happens.

Say what you will about either of those arguments, but I haven't claimed that they are the same argument.

Well, your explanation requires a bunch of people to hold obviously contradictory claims, my explanation just requires mild sarcasm. Of course, we could try to figure out which explanation was true if you or RoanokeIllinois provided the quotes/references we asked for, but I guess it's not in your interest to find out the truth.

I would agree, and the first step in proving such a thing would be to check out the original statements, which is why we asked RoanokeIllinois to provide quotes or references.

 

That makes no sense at all.

Again, there are devout Christians, including theologians, considering the issues of the powers of their god. In fact, that is where these issues receive the most educated thought and focus.

They are NOT doing so in an effort to determine whether their commitment to their god is justified.

 

its also a nice deflection!

news flash! religions people are not God.

your spin

its the one your logic pal is making!

Guiness book of world records adsurdium!

as we can see they do! LMAO

done

done

so prove it. lol

 

Rereading this, I need to clarify that by any above I meant to say all. It isn't an argument against all possible omnipotent omniscient Gods, just against those who dont wish things like cancer, hurricanes, etc to exist. That these things exist means that any omniscient omnipotent God intends them to.

 

How so? They made an argument, it seems to me it would be a deflection to not address the argument they made. (Of course the exact details of that argument is shining with its absence still).

I agree. Of course, nobody has claimed it is, so feel free to spell out your argument if you think you have one.

I'm not really seeing a reductio ad absurdum in that quote, but it doesn't really matter. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a reductio ad absurdum argument.

The rest of us see the reasonable arguments, only you are making the assumption that they're making the unreasonable one. That of course doesn't address the actual arguments, but it makes you look very scared of them.

Where? I haven't seen any references we can follow and determine the intent. Please put it here. The only link I see at all (in the OP) has no mention of God or religion.

 

I have Koko on ignore and didn't realize he is still obsessed with me. That's a quote from another thread (the one about infinite power). What I was saying is that the universe must be exactly as an omnipotent omniscient being wants it to be, if any such being exists. If the universe isn't how it wants it to be, then that being isn't omnipotent.

Does that mean we have no free will? I can see arguments both for and against that contention. It wasn't my argument either way. My only argument is that it rules out any omnipotent omniscient God who wishes the universe to be different. It does not rule out such a being who wants things like cancer, starvation, and tornados to exist.

I further asked if he is responsible for all we do since he created us knowing exactly all we would do. Does that mean we can't make decisions and have no free will? Maybe. I am not sure. God is wholely responsible if he is all powerful and all knowing, but does that mean we aren't also responsible?

Koko, as is his way, mocks the above but I bet you he doesn't make any attempt to actually address it, or even understand it.

 

Hilarious demonstration top shelf piss poor grammar comprehension skills!

Everything
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Everything, every-thing, or every thing is all that exists; the opposite of nothing, or its complement. It is the totality of things relevant to some subject matter.

FALSE
THIS IS A STATEMENT: "God is responsible for everything if all powerful and all knowing (which I did say)"
NOT A QUESTION!

Believe me I try not to mock it, honestly I try so hard again and again!

Same stupid **** over and over.

Wholly is an adverb that means "entirely." If a story is wholly inaccurate, no part of it is true. Do you like to do things the whole way or whole hog, refusing any halfhearted attempts? Then wholly is your kind of word — it means completely, totally, or to the full extent.

Wholly - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms - Vocabulary.com
https://www.vocabulary.com › dictionary › wholly

I try time and time again to save you from yourself but its impossible

If God is wholly (entirely) responsible, then people are not responsible for anything, PERIOD!
If God is responsible for everything then people are responsible for nothing, PERIOD!

 

You infer it you own it.

consider new glasses

I just did HERE

 

You have to blame it on something evidently because Joe Biden is apparently not responsible for anything whatsoever.