God's 'track record'

[nobspeople]

In another thread, a poster said the following:

Does that good track record, overall include eliminating war, hunger, corruption, injustice and suffering?

It made me wonder, how would god's track record rate?

Let's look at biblically supplied highlights (not in chronical order necessarily):
God created everything
Then it made man
Then mad was tempted by satan
This would mean god made satan and allowed satan to tempt man, knowing (if god's all knowing) that man would sin
Then god got mad and pouted like a spoiled child (editorializing a bit there but you get the jest) and made man to suffer through sin and ultimately die
God asks a guy to sacrifice his son, which he tries but then god sends an angel to stop it
God gets upset with a city and obliterates it from the planet
God gets upset with humanity and drowns all terrestrial life (including babies, women in the middle of child birth, animals (which have NOTHING to do with man's sin) and plants)
God THEN offers a sacrifice to sin as himself/son/self/son/self (the debate still lingers as to the specifics of this person)
This person lives a life to his early 30s
God allows a guy to betray himself/son/self/etc and allows history to see this guy as a traitor when, in all actuality, SOME guy had to do this in order to complete god's 'plan'
Then this god/man/god/man dies and raises from the dead
God allows mankind's history to be told in 'the bible', even though there are Es and Os which cause confusion for the remainder of humanity

Being that humanity is IMPERFECT and god (is said to be) PERFECT, we can't legitimately judge the two with the same measurement.
So let's judge god's 'track record':
or
or

How would YOU judge god's work?
How should god's work be judged?

[Diagoras]

You set the parameters of proof to conveniently exclude anything that might actually be evidence of God. The EYEBALL, for Christ's sake, is evidence of God.

The eyeball, you say? Would that evidence be something to do with its appearance of being designed? That (and similar arguments from irreducible complexity) is a well-known form of the teleological argument for God that states that complexity in the natural world which looks designed is evidence of an intelligent creator.

That's a whole 'nother debate right there. Have a look through the archives of the Science sub-forum here if you're interested.

The clotting cascade of blood is evidence of God, and that's just for starters

This does sound like an argument for design by reason of irreducible complexity, but you may mean something different?

...and if you are going to pooh-pooh that, then you're just a fool.

Perhaps you're not familiar with the conventions of debate, but can you at least see how this 'appeal to ridicule' is not helpful?

You're just someone who wants to be an atheist for secondary gains. That's the truth.

What gains are those? I might actually learn something about myself.

On monism (and particularly your 'everything is part of a God-dream) being provable, well that's yet another debate - probably better in the philosophy sub-forum.

[otseng]

if you are going to pooh-pooh that, then you're just a fool. You're just someone who wants to be an atheist for secondary gains.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid making any personal comments.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Veridican]

if you are going to pooh-pooh that, then you're just a fool. You're just someone who wants to be an atheist for secondary gains.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid making any personal comments.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

I apologize to Diagoras, and to forum at large. I come from a time when atheist vs. theist debates required thicker skins, but times have changed. I didn't even recognize what I said as an insult. I certainly didn't mean it to be.

[JoeyKnothead]

Snippings've been snipped...

[Replying to nobspeople in post #1]
I encounter this all the time with atheists--or did when I used to debate atheists.

I used to debate atheists. I still do, but I used to to. With pologies to Mitch.

...You're only able to be an atheist because you conveniently leave out any real definition of God.

That thing there folks claim they know the mind of, only they can't show they do.

How'd I do?

If you will allow yourself to imagine what God really is, then you won't have a problem.

"If you'll just play make believe."

God, being the monistic entity, is the only thing that really exists.

Insert 1 each, individual, assertion, unevidenced.

The only appropriate response to God is to fear Him, worship Him,

I don't worship nothing I fear.

Cept the pretty thing, she let's me see her nekkid.

But what you don't get is that you really don't have any choice.

I have the choice to wait and see if you're gonna put truth to your claims, or just go ahead and conclude you're just another preacher.

[JehovahsWitness]

In another thread, a poster said the following:

Does that good track record, overall include eliminating war, hunger, corruption, injustice and suffering?

It made me wonder, how would god's track record rate?

From an the atheistic point of view God has failed at nothing because he doesnt exist.

If the bible is to be believed, God hasn't tried to eliminate and of those things; So again he has never failed in any attempt to .




You're welcome,

JW

[nobspeople]

In another thread, a poster said the following:

Does that good track record, overall include eliminating war, hunger, corruption, injustice and suffering?

It made me wonder, how would god's track record rate?

From an the atheistic point of view God has failed at nothing because he doesnt exist.

If the bible is to be believed, God hasn't tried to eliminate and of those thing; So again he has never failed in any attempt to .




Your welcome,

JW

You're, not your
And YOU'RE welcome
What about an agnostic POV? Don't forget the agnostics

[JehovahsWitness]

What about an agnostic POV? Don't forget the agnostics

The agnotics have no idea.


Don't mention it,


JW

[nobspeople]

What about an agnostic POV? Don't forget the agnostics

The agnotics have no idea.


Don't mention it,


JW

That's not what agnostics are. Shame you either don't know or belittle them in such a non-christian way.

[Diagoras]

I used to debate atheists. I still do, but I used to to. With pologies to Mitch.

That put a smile on my face - loved that line of his!

[Miles]

...
God THEN offers a sacrifice to sin as himself/son/self/son/self ...

I think everything God does, is good,

I assume this would include his order to kill innocent women and children; and his decision to send bears to maul 42 kids to death because they made fun of some old bald guy; and that it was good that god decreed "Any man who has something wrong with him must not serve as priest and bring sacrifices to me. These men cannot serve as priests: blind men, crippled men, men with bad scars on their faces, men with arms or legs that are too long, 19 men with broken feet or hands, 20 men with bent backs, men who are dwarfs, men who are cross-eyed, men with rashes or bad skin diseases, and men with crushed testicles."


So why would these be good things simply because god did them?---I assume this is your reasoning. God condoned slavery. Do you think this is a good thing; that owning an other human being as property, and being able to beat them as long as they didn't die within a few days is good? Would you think so if you were that slave?


.