Total Posts:20|Showing Posts:1-20
Jump to topic:

God Exists But He Is Morally Indifferent

Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.
Shawn_Hartnell
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 10:32:20 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

Evidence?
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 10:32:38 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

If God is petty enough to initiate all of creation I think you are wrong, why would God not care? can you give me ONE reason that I should believe that, just one logical reason.

No one says God would have to share our "animalistic morality" (which I think you mean carnality) to care about it. You are correct, God is not evil, God does not torture people, especially for fun lol.
God is not hindered by ethics, we are.

The "plan so grand" involves US, we are the crowing glory of God's creation.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 10:58:34 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:

http://img.memecdn.com...
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
janesix
Posts: 3,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 11:15:21 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

I dont think gid is necissarily benevolent. Look at all the suffering and brutality in nature. Life feeds on life.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 2:04:08 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:32:20 PM, Shawn_Hartnell wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

Evidence?

The Problem Of Evil.
Quintilian
Posts: 35
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 3:03:36 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
How does the admittedly grand scope of God's activity lead you to the conclusion that He's indifferent about something within that scope?
Willows
Posts: 2,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 3:44:24 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:32:38 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

If God is petty enough to initiate all of creation I think you are wrong, why would God not care? can you give me ONE reason that I should believe that, just one logical reason.

No one says God would have to share our "animalistic morality" (which I think you mean carnality) to care about it. You are correct, God is not evil, God does not torture people, especially for fun lol.
God is not hindered by ethics, we are.

The "plan so grand" involves US, we are the crowing glory of God's creation.

If that's the case, He didn't set his sights very high did He?
Shawn_Hartnell
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 6:39:55 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/3/2016 2:04:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:32:20 PM, Shawn_Hartnell wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

Evidence?

The Problem Of Evil.

How is evil a problem? :)
VirBinarus
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 8:34:18 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/3/2016 6:39:55 AM, Shawn_Hartnell wrote:
At 7/3/2016 2:04:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:32:20 PM, Shawn_Hartnell wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

Evidence?

The Problem Of Evil.

How is evil a problem? :)

It creates a need for suffering.
"Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."
1 thessalonians, 5:11
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 9:35:47 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/3/2016 3:44:24 AM, Willows wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:32:38 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

If God is petty enough to initiate all of creation I think you are wrong, why would God not care? can you give me ONE reason that I should believe that, just one logical reason.

No one says God would have to share our "animalistic morality" (which I think you mean carnality) to care about it. You are correct, God is not evil, God does not torture people, especially for fun lol.
God is not hindered by ethics, we are.

The "plan so grand" involves US, we are the crowing glory of God's creation.

If that's the case, He didn't set his sights very high did He?

Is that in insult to yourself lol?
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 9:48:40 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

You are both right and wrong.

No he isn't interested in our petty morality, you worded that well.

Hower he is interested in those who wish to live by his very high standard of morality.

He is the very epitome of ethical, so whilst he does indeed have very big fish to fry, his ethical standards are very much involved in how he intends to achieve them.

Would an unethical being have bow to the demands of justice and give Satan a fair chance to prove his case?

No they would not, that is the highest standard of ethics and justice which say OK, justice has to be done, but it has to be seen to be done, and it has to apply as much to the guilty as the innocent.

Wold an unethical being have then turned round and provided a guarantee of something better and of a resurrection to that better life, at the risk of his only begotten son's life?

No they would not, they would simply have wiped everything out completely and started again, it would have been a lot less trouble.

Yes he has much bigger fish to fry.

He has to allow us to realise that he really does have the right to be our King, if through his son at present.

He has to get his creation back to what he wanted it so be in the first place.

Is he benevolent?

Yes, to those who wish to be a part of that plan.

But why she he be benevolent enough to those who only wish to disrupt it?

That would be exactly the same as turning to Satan and saying "OK I've lost, it's all yours". Why would he do that to a being he created as a servant to himself and his son?

The creator will never serve the creation, it must "serve" him by taking the role for which they were created to heart and simply enjoying it.

Animals don;t have a choice, they are ruled by instinct.

Humans have a choice, so choose wisely.

He won't.

Those who wish to have a part in that plan will benefit absolutely. They will have eternal lives in perfect undisturbed peace and security, with no worries about illness, death, famine, drought, war, being politically divided into groups clans or nations.So yes, he is indeed benevloent but only to those who wish to ebefit from his plan for his creation, including humanity.
Willows
Posts: 2,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 9:58:36 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/3/2016 9:35:47 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/3/2016 3:44:24 AM, Willows wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:32:38 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

If God is petty enough to initiate all of creation I think you are wrong, why would God not care? can you give me ONE reason that I should believe that, just one logical reason.

No one says God would have to share our "animalistic morality" (which I think you mean carnality) to care about it. You are correct, God is not evil, God does not torture people, especially for fun lol.
God is not hindered by ethics, we are.

The "plan so grand" involves US, we are the crowing glory of God's creation.

If that's the case, He didn't set his sights very high did He?

Is that in insult to yourself lol?
I get the last laugh here...I am not from the US.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 10:01:16 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/3/2016 9:58:36 AM, Willows wrote:
At 7/3/2016 9:35:47 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/3/2016 3:44:24 AM, Willows wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:32:38 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

If God is petty enough to initiate all of creation I think you are wrong, why would God not care? can you give me ONE reason that I should believe that, just one logical reason.

No one says God would have to share our "animalistic morality" (which I think you mean carnality) to care about it. You are correct, God is not evil, God does not torture people, especially for fun lol.
God is not hindered by ethics, we are.

The "plan so grand" involves US, we are the crowing glory of God's creation.

If that's the case, He didn't set his sights very high did He?

Is that in insult to yourself lol?
I get the last laugh here...I am not from the US.

Lol, okay you got me.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,598
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 3:13:42 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/3/2016 9:48:40 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

You are both right and wrong.

No he isn't interested in our petty morality, you worded that well.

Hower he is interested in those who wish to live by his very high standard of morality.

He is the very epitome of ethical, so whilst he does indeed have very big fish to fry, his ethical standards are very much involved in how he intends to achieve them.

Would an unethical being have bow to the demands of justice and give Satan a fair chance to prove his case?

Like Job?

No they would not, that is the highest standard of ethics and justice which say OK, justice has to be done, but it has to be seen to be done, and it has to apply as much to the guilty as the innocent.

Wold an unethical being have then turned round and provided a guarantee of something better and of a resurrection to that better life, at the risk of his only begotten son's life?

No they would not, they would simply have wiped everything out completely and started again, it would have been a lot less trouble.

Like the Flood?

Yes he has much bigger fish to fry.

He has to allow us to realise that he really does have the right to be our King, if through his son at present.

He has to get his creation back to what he wanted it so be in the first place.

Is he benevolent?

Yes, to those who wish to be a part of that plan.

But why she he be benevolent enough to those who only wish to disrupt it?

That would be exactly the same as turning to Satan and saying "OK I've lost, it's all yours". Why would he do that to a being he created as a servant to himself and his son?

The creator will never serve the creation, it must "serve" him by taking the role for which they were created to heart and simply enjoying it.

Animals don;t have a choice, they are ruled by instinct.

Humans have a choice, so choose wisely.

Humans ARE animals.

He won't.

Those who wish to have a part in that plan will benefit absolutely. They will have eternal lives in perfect undisturbed peace and security, with no worries about illness, death, famine, drought, war, being politically divided into groups clans or nations.So yes, he is indeed benevloent but only to those who wish to ebefit from his plan for his creation, including humanity.

God could just as easily created that on Earth, but choose to make most of Earth uninhabitable and dangerous to humans.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 4:25:49 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:32:38 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:

The "plan so grand" involves US, we are the crowing glory of God's creation.

A crowing glory which is in decline.
Hilarious.

I think I should stop taking you seriously. Intelectual debauchery is amusing for one or two runs. At the most.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 4:50:34 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/3/2016 4:25:49 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:32:38 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:

The "plan so grand" involves US, we are the crowing glory of God's creation.


A crowing glory which is in decline.
Hilarious.

I think I should stop taking you seriously. Intelectual debauchery is amusing for one or two runs. At the most.

When did you take me seriously?

Also, I don't recall conversing with you, maybe we should start there.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2016 8:09:42 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/3/2016 3:13:42 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 7/3/2016 9:48:40 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

You are both right and wrong.

No he isn't interested in our petty morality, you worded that well.

Hower he is interested in those who wish to live by his very high standard of morality.

He is the very epitome of ethical, so whilst he does indeed have very big fish to fry, his ethical standards are very much involved in how he intends to achieve them.

Would an unethical being have bow to the demands of justice and give Satan a fair chance to prove his case?

Like Job?

No they would not, that is the highest standard of ethics and justice which say OK, justice has to be done, but it has to be seen to be done, and it has to apply as much to the guilty as the innocent.

Wold an unethical being have then turned round and provided a guarantee of something better and of a resurrection to that better life, at the risk of his only begotten son's life?

No they would not, they would simply have wiped everything out completely and started again, it would have been a lot less trouble.

Like the Flood?

Yes he has much bigger fish to fry.

He has to allow us to realise that he really does have the right to be our King, if through his son at present.

He has to get his creation back to what he wanted it so be in the first place.

Is he benevolent?

Yes, to those who wish to be a part of that plan.

But why she he be benevolent enough to those who only wish to disrupt it?

That would be exactly the same as turning to Satan and saying "OK I've lost, it's all yours". Why would he do that to a being he created as a servant to himself and his son?

The creator will never serve the creation, it must "serve" him by taking the role for which they were created to heart and simply enjoying it.

Animals don;t have a choice, they are ruled by instinct.

Humans have a choice, so choose wisely.


Humans ARE animals.

He won't.

Those who wish to have a part in that plan will benefit absolutely. They will have eternal lives in perfect undisturbed peace and security, with no worries about illness, death, famine, drought, war, being politically divided into groups clans or nations.So yes, he is indeed benevloent but only to those who wish to ebefit from his plan for his creation, including humanity.

God could just as easily created that on Earth, but choose to make most of Earth uninhabitable and dangerous to humans.

No he didn't.

The Sahara was once a fertile area, it is man who has turned it into desert by over-deforesting it. The same an be said for all deserts on this planet. Mankind used up too much wood, too fast for it to regrow, and probably with no thought of the consequences, as usual.

Jehovah made the Garden of Eden, and left the rest of the earth uncultivated but fertile, so that Adam and his posterity could have the pleasure of expanding their little paradise as they also grew.

No doubt it will be similar for the armageddon survivors and the resurrected ones, and they will be given the very satisfying task of working to restore the earth to what it was.

I am looking forward to being able to make my little contribution to that.
illegalcombat
Posts: 632
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 7:41:38 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 10:26:16 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't think the grand mind that the universe is continent upon is petty enough to care about our animalistic morality, let alone share it. Our morality is useful for the survival of the species but God is way beyond that. I don't think God is evil and that he tortures people for fun or anything, but I don't think he is benevolent either. God has "bigger fish to fry" with a plan so grand that it would be foolish to think it would be hindered by ethics.

Why do you think there is some "grand plan" in the first place ?
Casten
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 8:09:33 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
An amoral God isn't the God people want. You might as well ask them to throw emotions out the window in their relationship with him.