Why is god so egoistic?

[Pooeypants]

Originally posted by Rainbow,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rainbow,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-LogicaLunatic, Ahh, so you answer a set of questions with a set of questions of your own and then demand that YOUR questions be answered first. I don't blame Castille. I'd ignore you too. LL

Nice. Enjoy your masturbation :-)))

castille based its statement on assumptions
That is the difference, and that is why I asked questions, because these assumptions are wrong. castille has NO argument to support its statements.
This is just a plain claptrap.[/b][/quote]
Castille's way of questioning is nearly always in a satirical manner, though I do condone it but his point stands, why does a God need worshipping? Why are we sent to Hell for not worshipping?

[LDS]

why does a God need worshipping?

Its not so much for his benefit as it is for our benefit. Of all the other things we have on this earth, our cars, our money none of them are a 'sure foundation' all of them are subject to the earth. If our happiness is built on these false idols, where does that leave us when they fail?

Why are we sent to Hell for not worshipping?

Why is the foolish mans house destroyed when he built on the sand?

[Ken Carman]

Originally posted by LDS, why does a God need worshipping? Its not so much for his benefit as it is for our benefit. Of all the other things we have on this earth, our cars, our money none of them are a 'sure foundation' all of them are subject to the earth. If our happiness is built on these false idols, where does that leave us when they fail? QUOTE  Why are we sent to Hell for not worshipping? Why is the foolish mans house destroyed when he built on the sand?

Argument # 1

This argument has been used by all the Jimmy Joneses, and every religion since humanity started worshipping. It's all for our own good. Indeed, this is what the sleezy salesman uses when he rips off grandma for her life savings with some pyramid scheme. It seems an intelligent deity would have better rationale than this, and know it would strike many as a con job. Sometimes I wonder, if Jesus really was the "son of God," if once he entered human form he found out just how difficult it was to be human.

Argument # 2

Maybe what some consider to be a "foolish man" is someone simply learning how to build better houses? We all learn at our own pace, and sometimes it takes someone building a metaphorical house on what many consider to be sand to find out there's a better way. Once again, any deity with an ounce of intelligence would realize all this and also that he has a lot of competition out there and to use the timeless, tiresome tactic of "worship me or else" doesn't work and makes many of us naturally suspicious.

Just another way to look at it all.

[Pooeypants]

Originally posted by LDS,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (LDS,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Its not so much for his benefit as it is for our benefit. Of all the other things we have on this earth, our cars, our money none of them are a 'sure foundation' all of them are subject to the earth. If our happiness is built on these false idols, where does that leave us when they fail?[/b]

I'm still struggling to comprehend why worshipping an invisible sky fairy can help us, please don't answer my question with rhetoric.

<!--QuoteBegin-LDS,
Why is the foolish mans house destroyed when he built on the sand?[/quote]
Law's of physics took place? He wasn't a very engineer? You tell me.

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by Pooeypants, Castille's way of questioning is nearly always in a satirical manner, though I do condone it but his point stands, why does a God need worshipping? Why are we sent to Hell for not worshipping?

#1
No idea.
Since We - HomoSappiens, have no clue on God, how can We say wehther God wants Us to worship Him or not ?
#2
No idea.
Since We - Homo Sappiens, have no clue on God, what can We say about Hell ?

[Mia]

Originally posted by Pooeypants,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Pooeypants,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Mia, Questioning statements that obviously don't have any basis in fact is the appropriate thing to do, and Rainbow cannot be expected to debate until Castille clarifies his position.

It's a simple question, Why does your God needs worshipping? Though a better question is, how do we know?[/b][/quote]

No. The question was: When did Castille hear God complaining about a lack of worshipers?

This is what Rainbow and I want answered.

[LDS]

It seems an intelligent deity would have better rationale than this

Better rationale than making us better than we are?

I'm still struggling to comprehend why worshipping an invisible sky fairy can help us, please don't answer my question with rhetoric.

Invisible? Can you see gravity? Does gravity exist? Can you see the microwaves which cook my burrito? Do they exist? The visible spectrum is minute to say the least, what are you missing if seeing is the only thing which will allow you to believe?


How could having an omniscient omnipotent friend not be beneficial?

Law's of physics took place? He wasn't a very engineer? You tell me.

Sand shifts, its not very stable substance. Compare that to the happiness brought by things of the world (luxurious cars, large sums of wealth, etc...) The happiness brought by these things is temporary, and largely apt to shift to misery (ever see a guy who spends so much on keeping and maintaining a vehicle,for vanities sake,to have it lost or damaged?)

[Melvyn]

Originally posted by castille, Why he is complaining about a lack of worshippers, when he knew this would happen in the first place?

I didn't know God was complaining. Humans behaved badly in the world God gave them, Eden (According to the Old Testament). God sent them out of that world into the world they would rule. God set up various opportunities for humanity to get back in His Graces. Sadly, except for a few notable exceptions we never have. It is not a matter of God complaining, it is a matter of our misbehaving.


Mel - Blogging at http://radio.weblogs.com/0137954/

[LogicaLunatic]

Originally posted by Mia, Questioning statements that obviously don't have any basis in fact is the appropriate thing to do, and Rainbow cannot be expected to debate until Castille clarifies his position.

I'm back all...

Mia, no discussion about God in the history of our species has ever been based on "fact." It appears Rainbow can't be expected to debate at ALL. Castille provided the reasons he thinks the way he does. An appropriate, "debate like" response would be to explain to Castille why his/her take on Christianity is incorrect based on Rainbow's beliefs/knowledge.

[LogicaLunatic]

Originally posted by Rainbow,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rainbow,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-castille, Why does the Christian god have an ego the size of a Christian priest's sex crimes record? He demands to be worshipped, threatens to execute anyone who refuses ("Hell" after all is his threat). Yet he (or she, or it) created men in the first place. So if this god created all humans....doesn't that mean he/she/it would know not all humans are going to worship him/her/it? Why he is complaining about a lack of worshippers, when he knew this would happen in the first place?

#1
How do you know, that God has an ego ?
#2
How do you know, what God demands ?
#3
How do you know, that God has created Homo Sappiens ?
#4
How do you know, that God is complaining on anything ?

Generally, your statements are based on your own assumptions.[/b][/quote]

1) That is his take, explain why you think he is wrong and then debate starts.

2) See #1

3) See #1

4) See #1

[LogicaLunatic]

Originally posted by Rainbow,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rainbow,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-LogicaLunatic, Ahh, so you answer a set of questions with a set of questions of your own and then demand that YOUR questions be answered first. I don't blame Castille.  I'd ignore you too. LL

Nice. Enjoy your masturbation :-)))

castille based its statement on assumptions
That is the difference, and that is why I asked questions, because these assumptions are wrong. castille has NO argument to support its statements.
This is just a plain claptrap.[/b][/quote]

Thanks, I enjoyed my masturbation quite a bit.

Here YOU are complaining about Castille's lack of argument when you didn't provide any yourself.


"...because these assumptions are wrong."

And your argument supporting that is.................................

"Castille has NO argument to support its statements. This is just plain claptrap."

You are a SMOOOOOOTH logician.

I'm not supporting Castille's position in this post in any way. I'm just trying to show you how your post led to a lack of debate.

And off I go to masturbate some more.

http://www.kittenkiller.org/

LL

[LogicaLunatic]

Originally posted by Mia, No. The question was: When did Castille hear God complaining about a lack of worshipers? This is what Rainbow and I want answered.

He didn't. I heard it and told him.

[orgaelin]

Establishing your happiness according to God is a bit foolish, just like building your house on the sand.

I'm not saying material things are any better, as they're not much use to us when we die...

But I wouldn't set my happiness by a God who hasn't actually done anything for thousands of years. I mean, just where the hell is the old guy? He used to be an active god, blowing up cities, sending down angels and stuff... has he lost interest? Started a new project? Found some more worthy worshippers? Is he dead?!

The very least he could do is pop in and say hi. If he did, everyone would instantly start worshipping and realise he was real. He could just come on down and do something impressive that everyone could experience, and then people would believe. It wouldn't even be interfering with free will, because we could still choose not to believe.

But no. He would much rather we believe without proof, as that is much more of a boost to his ego.

Have you heard of the phrase used to describe people with a very reasonable sense of reality and decency:~ "Down to earth"? Maybe that's his problem? If the biblical god is real then I say he's a fool.

[orgaelin]

Originally posted by LDS, Anyone else find it interisting how the same thing can be viewed differently? I've always viewed god not as demanding, but inviting us to heed his warnings (not threats). After all is it a threat if you tell someone not to put their hand on the stove or they'll get burned?

LDS, I find it interesting how you deliberately blind yourself to the blatently obvious. It is strictly NOT possible to be a believer without ignoring certain facts, like all the biblical contradictions.

As for the stove question... I know not to put my hand on the stove because I will get burned because it is hot... the difference here is that the stove is not deliberately and vengefully exacting punnishment. It does not make a choice to burn you. God does. God gets angry, feels the need for revenge, and damns you to hell for all eternity.

The two things are about as different as black and pink.

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by LogicaLunatic,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (LogicaLunatic,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by Rainbow,@ <!--QuoteBegin-castille, Why does the Christian god have an ego the size of a Christian priest's sex crimes record? He demands to be worshipped, threatens to execute anyone who refuses ("Hell" after all is his threat). Yet he (or she, or it) created men in the first place. So if this god created all humans....doesn't that mean he/she/it would know not all humans are going to worship him/her/it? Why he is complaining about a lack of worshippers, when he knew this would happen in the first place? #1 How do you know, that God has an ego ? #2 How do you know, what God demands ? #3 How do you know, that God has created Homo Sappiens ? #4 How do you know, that God is complaining on anything ? Generally, your statements are based on your own assumptions.

1) That is his take, explain why you think he is wrong and then debate starts.

2) See #1

3) See #1

4) See #1[/b][/quote]

A1 (it applies to A2, A3, A4)
There is no need to explain anything, since castille is the one who should provide arguments to support its statements, not me.
castille is the author of the initialized thread, and submited all the issues, not me.
What is to debate about, then ? especially since castille has not even bothered to post ANY reply regarding this matter.

It seems that castille is "much smarter" than all of us.
He provided us with some materials, while watching aside us to "fight each other" over issues with no bases for any discusion.
Is castille that "smart", or it is a coincidence, that is yet another (off-topic) matter.

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by LogicaLunatic, Thanks, I enjoyed my masturbation quite a bit. Here YOU are complaining about Castille's lack of argument when you didn't provide any yourself. "...because these assumptions are wrong." And your argument supporting that is................................. "Castille has NO argument to support its statements.  This is just plain claptrap." I'm not supporting Castille's position in this post in any way.  I'm just trying to show you how your post led to a lack of debate. And off I go to masturbate some more.

#1
Good workout, no doubt :-)))))
#2
There is not much to "complain". I wait for castille answers.
#3
Since LogicLunatic is "Very Busy Contemplating" :-))))) , here it is an exculsive rephrase addressed to him as my answer :
- "because these arguments are wrong"
and
- "Castille has NO argument to support its statements. This is just plain claptrap."
written (posted) by myself.
The second sentence clearly provides the answer "why" castille is "incorrect".
#4
There is not much to debate or polemize, then.
#5
I wish it is going to be extremely successful and full of joy :-)))))

[LDS]

like all the biblical contradictions.

Joseph Smith Translations help with that.

The two things are about as different as black and pink.

No, no different, only different in your mind.


You could not dwell with a perfect and just god under a consciousness of your own guilt, it would be better for you to dwell with the damned souls in hell.

Dont you see why it is so necessary that we heed our gods commands?

God who hasn't actually done anything for thousands of years.

Amos 3:7


How could god do anything when we refused to let him do anything during that time(dark ages)?

believe without proof

There is proof, great proof. It does require sacrifice and faith to recieve that proof, but proof there is.

[LogicaLunatic]

Originally posted by Rainbow, Since LogicLunatic is "Very Busy Contemplating" :-))))) , here it is an exculsive rephrase addressed to him as my answer : - "because these arguments are wrong" and - "Castille has NO argument to support its statements. This is just plain claptrap." written (posted) by myself. The second sentence clearly provides the answer "why" castille is "incorrect".

You can't have it both ways. If that is support for the statement that Castille's arguments are wrong then...

"He demands to be worshipped, threatens to execute anyone who refuses ("Hell" after all is his threat)."

...is support for the statment that God has a huge ego.

Well I'm done debating debating. :) Time to log into www.kittenkiller.org again.

LL

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by LogicaLunatic, "He demands to be worshipped, threatens to execute anyone who refuses ("Hell" after all is his threat)." ...is support for the statment that God has a huge ego.

That statement supports "nothing", instead.
Where such statements have been taken from ? What is the source ?

[orgaelin]

Originally posted by LDS, Joseph Smith Translations help with that.

They help YOU. They're only helpful if you believe in them. If you are a scholar looking for objective explanations, JS is just another apologist.

No, no different, only different in your mind.

Trust me, black and pink and very different. It's not just in my mind.

You could not dwell with a perfect and just god under a consciousness of your own guilt, it would be better for you to dwell with the damned souls in hell.

So you're saying that if I was somehow able to look at things objectively and honestly enough, I would see that, given a choice, I would PREFER to live in hell and suffering instead of feel guilty whilst living in God's paradise?

Do you have even a basic understanding of psychology?!

Dont you see why it is so necessary that we heed our gods commands?

Yes I do: if we don't, we suffer hell for eternity.

How could god do anything when we refused to let him do anything during that time(dark ages)?

You forget; the Catholics were acting on god's behalf, just like the bible was written on god's behalf, i.e. it was god's will.

And the dark ages weren't so dark. The only reason they are called dark is because there is little record of what happened during those years. This is because the church burned a lot of it, and because they actively discouraged any form of learning that wasn't directly from the preacher's mouth.

God was more present in the dark ages than ever. The dark ages were god's golden age of man, when no-one dared to question him, no-one sought truths other than him, and his representatives on earth were in total control of everyone... oh and he got to have a few millions witches killed too!

There is proof, great proof. It does require sacrifice and faith to recieve that proof, but proof there is.

The whole 'blind faith' thing is a missinterpretation. Faith really is a requirement for seeing beyond the scientific world - you really do have to believe before you see certain things. I think that's what the bible authors may have had in mind, but the message has been twisted. God doesn't demand faith or you'll suffer... it's just that without faith you'll never know him. That's just the way it is.

Now I'm going to watch Queer Eye!