Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:09 am  

If i was a good charitable person, never said boo to a goose and loved my neighbour and was an all round good egg but didn't believe in god would i been as less of a person when i died as someone who raped killed stole and lied his whole life to repent on their death bed and accept god in to their life?

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:31 am  

kirkstaller wrote:

Because any of us in Adam's place would have done the same thing.

Not me, for a start. I don't like fruit. There, that just debunked your theory didn't it?

kirkstaller wrote:

God did not create Satan.

Who did? You admit you don't know who created your god, now you admit that perhaps his main competitor was not a creation of his either. I deduce that there must be another creator, one who pre-dates your god, and seemingly can do things your's can't. Isn't that a tad worrying for you? Especially as you have no clue who this super-god might be?

kirkstaller wrote:

God is sovereign. Who are you, a mere human being, to question his plan?

God doesn't exist. If he did, I wouldn't "question" this sort of plan, I would declare it to be psychopathic madness.

kirkstaller wrote:

He gave us free will.

Not according to you, not in any meaningful sense, you say he created us knowing 100% definitely what we would each of us do, therefore clearly each of our actions would be pre-ordained by our creator. If god knows what I am going to do next week, then self-evidently whatever I do can't be my fault, as I have no choice in the matter.

kirkstaller wrote:

He created the set, the actors, the script – but he lets us decide what actually happens on stage.

You cannot escape the logic that as he knows what I am going to do, I have no choice. I cannot decide. Because if I decided differently, then your god would have been wrong, and we can't have that, can we?

kirkstaller wrote:

You underestimate the severity of sin

Not me. Your god, OTOH, regularly seems to.

kirkstaller wrote:

I wouldn’t say that any of the Bible is lunacy. Perhaps Mintball would care to oblige?

Whether she cares to or not, there is such a wealth of lunacy and contradiction that it is hard to know even where to start. OK,tell us, where do you stand on this:
"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man." (1 Tim. 2:12-14)"
Sounds fairly barking to me. Then again, what about forcing virgin rape victims to marry their rapists, who if caught have to pay a small fee to the victim's dad?
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 "28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. "

What about God threatening to force disobedient people into having adulterous sex?
"This is what the Lord says: "Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight." (2 Sam. 12:11)"
Or maybe slaughtering thousands of children on a whim?
"At midnight the Lord struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. (Exod. 12:29)
Oh, hang on. I presume that bit was ok since according to you,

kirkstaller wrote:

All babies are sinful.

kirkstaller wrote:

I have yet to see any logic or reason from you, only tantrums at how unfair you think God is.

A man who has actually gone into print with "All babies are sinful" challenges me on logic! You couldn't make it up!

But he does seem to be unfair to fig trees:
Matthew 21:19-20
19 And seeing a fig tree by the road, He came to it and found nothing on it but leaves, and said to it, “Let no fruit grow on you ever again.” Immediately the fig tree withered away.
As god, you'd have thought he'd know why fig trees don't have figs on them all the time, instead of getting so upset. What is this if not lunacy?

If you fail to see the dozens of pieces of logic it is because you are blind. As god certainly does not exist, it would be a stretch even on your part to ascribe to me a view that a non-existent entity is "unfair". What I am doing is explaining what a piece of work your god would have to be, if he existed as described in your books. The point is to convince you that he doesn't exist, and that even if he did, then he'd be someone to steer well clear of.

kirkstaller wrote:

Tony Nicklinson wants to play God as much as Adam and Eve did.

Maybe he just wants to follow the example of Jesus, who voluntarily had himself killed?

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:39 am  

Horatio Yed wrote:

If i was a good charitable person, never said boo to a goose and loved my neighbour and was an all round good egg but didn't believe in god would i been as less of a person when i died as someone who raped killed stole and lied his whole life to repent on their death bed and accept god in to their life?

I’ll respond to your question, but if you have any more then please PM me

The scenario you have given is not a realistic one, particularly from the Christian perspective. You have labelled yourself ‘good’, but how is good defined, and who defines what is good?

Let me ask you a few questions:

Have you ever told a lie?

Have you ever stolen anything?

Have you ever taken the Lord’s name in vain?

Have you ever looked at a woman with lust?

If so, in God’s eyes you are not a good person, you are a criminal. Criminals deserve punishment, and the punishment for guilty sinners is eternal separation from God in Hell. Since everyone has sinned and falls short of the glory of God, we are all destined for this punishment – yes, everyone - you, me, Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Hitler, Stalin, Bin Laden and even the Pope.

The good news is that there is a way we can avoid this terrible fate. Because God loves us so much, he provided us with a way to be reconciled with him and have our sins washed away. He did this by giving up the life of his only begotten son – Jesus – who took the punishment for us. In order to have our transgressions forgiven, all God asks for is an admission of guilt. He wants humility. We must understand that even if by human standards we judge ourselves to be good, we still break God’s commandments and fall short of his mark.

Anyone can receive God’s grace – it doesn’t matter if you’re a serial killer or a ‘good, charitable person’.

I hope this answers your question.

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:07 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Not me, for a start. I don't like fruit. There, that just debunked your theory didn't it?

Damn, you got me there.

Who did? You admit you don't know who created your god, now you admit that perhaps his main competitor was not a creation of his either. I deduce that there must be another creator, one who pre-dates your god, and seemingly can do things your's can't. Isn't that a tad worrying for you? Especially as you have no clue who this super-god might be?

God created angels before the creation of the universe. The Bible does not mention any other God.

Not according to you, not in any meaningful sense, you say he created us knowing 100% definitely what we would each of us do, therefore clearly each of our actions would be pre-ordained by our creator. If god knows what I am going to do next week, then self-evidently whatever I do can't be my fault, as I have no choice in the matter.

You cannot escape the logic that as he knows what I am going to do, I have no choice. I cannot decide. Because if I decided differently, then your god would have been wrong, and we can't have that, can we?

Can you explain to me how God’s knowledge of our decisions has any influence on them?

Say I recorded a game of rugby league on Sky+. I then read about what happens in the game – the big decisions, the tries, the controversies. Then I go back and watch the game from the beginning. Are the decisions of the players influenced by my foreknowledge? Do they have any choice in whether they commit a high tackle or not? Of course they do.

Before you say that this example is different because the event has already happened, remember that God exists outside of time – he is in the past, present and future. Knowing what will happen or what has happened does not equate to influence.

Whether she cares to or not, there is such a wealth of lunacy and contradiction that it is hard to know even where to start. OK,tell us, where do you stand on this:
"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man." (1 Tim. 2:12-14)"

What do you mean where do I stand on this? It’s exactly what it says on the tin.

Then again, what about forcing virgin rape victims to marry their rapists, who if caught have to pay a small fee to the victim's dad?
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 "28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. "

You’re quoting Jewish ceremonial law. That is not God’s moral law, and even if it was, it does not convey any endorsement from God as to the morality of such a procedure.

What about God threatening to force disobedient people into having adulterous sex?
"This is what the Lord says: "Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight." (2 Sam. 12:11)"

God is threatening to do this to David because David has committed great evil.

Or maybe slaughtering thousands of children on a whim?
"At midnight the Lord struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. (Exod. 12:29)
Oh, hang on. I presume that bit was ok since according to you,

That was a curse over Egypt for their wicked treatment of God’s people.

But he does seem to be unfair to fig trees:
Matthew 21:19-20
19 And seeing a fig tree by the road, He came to it and found nothing on it but leaves, and said to it, “Let no fruit grow on you ever again.” Immediately the fig tree withered away.
As god, you'd have thought he'd know why fig trees don't have figs on them all the time, instead of getting so upset. What is this if not lunacy?

What has this got to do with anything? You should learn the lesson of the fig tree – God loves fruit bearing people.

If you fail to see the dozens of pieces of logic it is because you are blind. As god certainly does not exist, it would be a stretch even on your part to ascribe to me a view that a non-existent entity is "unfair". What I am doing is explaining what a piece of work your god would have to be, if he existed as described in your books. The point is to convince you that he doesn't exist, and that even if he did, then he'd be someone to steer well clear of.

If you did accept God, as described in the Bible, how on earth is it logical to ‘steer well clear’ of him?

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:23 am  

Because, like you, he's a barm pot.

Have you ever run for the council?

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:46 am  

kirkstaller wrote:

Damn, you got me there.

You've been got, hundreds of times, and not just by me. Monty Python's knight has nothing on you.

kirkstaller wrote:

God created angels before the creation of the universe. The Bible does not mention any other God.

Angels are as fictitious as your god. The issue was WHO CREATED GOD but as you have already admitted that you don't know, looks like I got you again. Job done.

kirkstaller wrote:

Can you explain to me how God’s knowledge of our decisions has any influence on them?

They are in no meaningful way "decisions" given that according to you each and every one was pre-ordained by your god.

kirkstaller wrote:

Say I recorded a game of rugby league on Sky+. I then read about what happens in the game – the big decisions, the tries, the controversies. Then I go back and watch the game from the beginning. Are the decisions of the players influenced by my foreknowledge? Do they have any choice in whether they commit a high tackle or not? Of course they do.

Utterly ridiculous analogy. At no time did you have foreknowledge of what would happen in any future event. You chose to view a historical event. A better analogy would be if you had created a player and knew that tomorrow he would be sent off, for fouling another player. As the event has been pre-ordained, he has no choice in the matter. If he does not foul the player and does not get sent off then you would have been wrong and for a god that would never do.

kirkstaller wrote:

Before you say that this example is different because the event has already happened, remember that God exists outside of time

Say what? As predicted, you have just come up with some more metaphysical mumbo jumbo, as you invariably do whenever something is too hard. You just make absurd claims and state them as if they are some sort of fact, not a breathtakingly nutty proposition, based on no evidence at all. No, I do NOT "remember" that "god exists outside of time" - he does not exist at all.

kirkstaller wrote:

What do you mean where do I stand on this? It’s exactly what it says on the tin.

* I mean it is nutty to say, for example, that women cannot teach, and I was wondering whether you agree that women cannot teach, which would be nutty. I presume, from your answer, that nuts it is?

* I mean it is nutty to say, for example, that a woman cannot be a Crown Court judge, and sentence a man for his crimes, and I was wondering whether you accept that, or whether you think that women cannot have any authority over men under any circumstances, which would be nutty. I presume from your answer that nuts it is?

kirkstaller wrote:

You’re quoting Jewish ceremonial law. That is not God’s moral law, and even if it was, it does not convey any endorsement from God as to the morality of such a procedure.

I'm quoting your Bible! So at least you agree that some of the Bible is bollox? Progress, I suppose.

kirkstaller wrote:

God is threatening to do this to David because David has committed great evil.

Say what? What is he threatening to do "to David"? He's actually threatening reprisals not to David, but to someone nothing to do with the issue which so upsets god.

kirkstaller wrote:

That was a curse over Egypt for their wicked treatment of God’s people.

So slaughtering a whole generation of babies is not nutty in your view. At least you admit it, but it does make you look as nutty as the god who would do such a thing, in the land of the sane.

kirkstaller wrote:

What has this got to do with anything?

That it sounds nutty to me for "the Lord" to kill a fig tree for having the temerity not to be in fruit. Again, your support for nuttiness is noted.

In keeping with your wish to remain on topic, I will close by pointing out I find it interesting that the thing you conspicuously fail to comment on is that in effect Nicklinson just wants to follow the example of Jesus, who voluntarily had himself killed. Too hard a point?

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:47 am  

kirkstaller wrote:

God created angels before the creation of the universe.

Isn't Lucifer/Satan a fallen angel? Ergo, created by god?

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:50 am  

Chris28 wrote:

Isn't Lucifer/Satan a fallen angel? Ergo, created by god?

poop, another design bummer

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 11:03 am  

Tony Nicklinson has died.

Re: The right to die : Wed Aug 22, 2012 11:10 am  

kirkstaller wrote:

Tony Nicklinson wants to play God as much as Adam and Eve did.

Are you actually serious with that comment?

Wow