God must be a sadist

[QuickSilver]

@pchaos

I know that there have been great atheists in history and some say that Buffett and Gates are atheists. All I have to say is that atheists don’t give me a sense of community and they don’t give me an answer as to why I should persist.

This is ironic because Buffet and Gates have contributed greatly in supporting communities around the world. I suspect those who have benefited from their humanitarian efforts are greatful for the sense of community these atheists helped to support and actually preserve.

@pchaos

Like that hypothetical I gave earlier, if you were the grandfather and every fiber of your being wants to scream out this God makes no sense. What would you do? I would say with conviction that your son has gone to a better place and God has a plan.

Of course you would. Why would you say something that would add to the grief and loss? To say something that would comfort the berieved seems the reasonable thing to do. You can shake your fist at the heavens on your own time, if you want.

[Marley23]

@pchaos

All I have to say is that atheists don’t give me a sense of community and they don’t give me an answer as to why I should persist.

Most atheists would say you need to find your own community and your own answer. You can find a community of atheists if you want one, or you can find any other community of people that has meaning for you. And you find your own reason to live.

Like that hypothetical I gave earlier, if you were the grandfather and every fiber of your being wants to scream out this God makes no sense. What would you do? I would say with conviction that your son has gone to a better place and God has a plan.

Why are you required to do anything? Why would you presume your commentary on God was called for? That sounds extraordinarily presumptuous. When someone is grieving and says something like this, they are expressing their pain at a loss that makes no sense to them and will not go away. They’re not starting a theological debate.

[Human_Action]

@pchaos

I’ll absolutely do that and I’ll be the first to admit it. Although at one time Christianity may have been considered logical, I don’t believe it is at this time. At least for me it’s not a matter of logic. It is a rational system based on experiences and thought.

If you mean “It’s rational to be a Christian”, then I can agree with you. If you mean “Christianity is rational”, then I don’t. This is because being a Christian can have psychic and social benefits.

@pchaos

I know that there have been great atheists in history and some say that Buffett and Gates are atheists. All I have to say is that atheists don’t give me a sense of community and they don’t give me an answer as to why I should persist.

Right, there’s not much correlation between religiosity and being a good or bad person.

I’m an atheist, and I have a sense of community, it’s just not based on a shared religion, but rather other shared aspects of culture, place, and time. So it’s not an either/or situation.

As to why people should persist in living, that’s something each person has to confront. I hold that that there is no meaning to the world beyond what meaning we, as individuals, give to it. Christianity is one such meaning, and if it works for you and doesn’t have harmful consequences that outweigh the benefits, then by all means, continue.

@pchaos

Like that hypothetical I gave earlier, if you were the grandfather and every fiber of your being wants to scream out this God makes no sense. What would you do? I would say with conviction that your son has gone to a better place and God has a plan.

That’s one approach, yes. But, note that if you don’t believe in a god, then you won’t be screaming out that God makes no sense, will you? If you believe in a naturalistic world of cause and effect, and don’t search for some deeper meaning behind events, then you don’t have that dilemma of trying to reconcile an omnipotent god allowing and creating human suffering. In that case, your grandson died (in your hypothetical) in a friendly fire accident; he died because he was mistakenly shot. No god orchestrated it.

@QuickSilver

And yet you are. As are so many others.

Christianity is more than just the text of the Bible, it’s also the actual practice of Christianity. And this actual practice doesn’t include god being a sadist.

@Marley23

Everybody knows that. I think he was disagreeing with you about the “it was logical” part. It wasn’t. That was the belief and the prejudice of the time.

Logic is only as good as the premises that underlie it. Here, I can use logic to prove that black folk are inferior:

Human worth is measured by acheivements in technology.
White humans have made the most such acheivements.
Non-white humans are worth less than white humans.

My premise is faulty, not the logic, yes? Then again, I only took one college course in logic, so I may be wrong here.

[Cumberdale]

@Human_Action

Christianity is more than just the text of the Bible, it’s also the actual practice of Christianity. And this actual practice doesn’t include god being a sadist.

When Pat Robertson and his ilk say that their god sent a hurricane that killed hundreds of people because we are being nice to gays, that strikes me as god being a sadist.

When a Catholic hospitals don’t actually help the suffering because their god views suffering as good, that is sadistic.

When “holy men” say that unbelievers are going to burn in hell for all eternity even if they are decent people, their god is sadistic.

[Human_Action]

@Cumberdale

When Pat Robertson and his ilk say that their god sent a hurricane that killed hundreds of people because we are being nice to gays, that strikes me as god being a sadist.

Pat Robertson is not representative of mainsteam American Christendom. There are certainly fundamentalists and fringe groups that interpret every word of the Bible literally (and others that try to prove it through pseudoscience), but their views are so different from mainstream Christians that it’s barely the same religion.

@Cumberdale

When a Catholic hospitals don’t actually help the suffering because their god views suffering as good, that is sadistic.

Eh? Cite?

@Cumberdale

When “holy men” say that unbelievers are going to burn in hell for all eternity even if they are decent people, their god is sadistic.

Sadism is “the derivation of pleasure as a result of inflicting pain, cruelty, degradation, or humiliation, or, watching such behaviors inflicted on others.” The Christian view (that all men have sinned, that only through God can sin be forgiven (salvation), and that sin will be punished in the afterlife) of hell doesn’t indicate sadism.

[pchaos]

@Cumberdale

When “holy men” say that unbelievers are going to burn in hell for all eternity even if they are decent people, their god is sadistic.

When I responded to Joshua’s Challenged I admitted that there are evil Christians, I’m pretty sure there must be evil people involved in all religions and philosophies.

[Marley23]

@pchaos

When I responded to Joshua’s Challenged I admitted that there are evil Christians, I’m pretty sure there must be evil people involved in all religions and philosophies.

And you could say the same about various gods, at least according to the scriptures their believers use and the descriptions given by believers.

[QuickSilver]

@Human_Action

Christianity is more than just the text of the Bible, it’s also the actual practice of Christianity. And this actual practice doesn’t include god being a sadist.

We may have come a long way since the vengeful god of yore, but for pchaos to claim that he does not wish to be part of religion that contains a sadistic god is simply picking sweet cherries among the sour fruit.

[Razncain]

@Human_Action

Eh? Cite?

The Missionary Position, Mother Theresa in Theory and Practice

[Human_Action]

@QuickSilver

We may have come a long way since the vengeful god of yore, but for pchaos to claim that he does not wish to be part of religion that contains a sadistic god is simply picking sweet cherries among the sour fruit.

That’s what modern Christianity is, the sweet cherries: the words and works of Christ, and a social club. You have to go to the fringes if you want to be preached to about slaves obeying their masters, stoneing people, unbaptized babies writhing in hellfire, or Joshua’s conquests.

[Marley23]

@Human_Action

That’s what modern Christianity is, the sweet cherries: the words and works of Christ, and a social club. You have to go to the fringes if you want to be preached to about slaves obeying their masters, stoneing people, unbaptized babies writhing in hellfire, or Joshua’s conquests.

Would anti-gay views be “sweet cherries,” or is that just the belief of the fringe? I’d like to see some cites on how many people hold which beliefs, because I think you’re defining “mainstream” and “fundamentalist” in an arbitrary way.

[Human_Action]

@razncain

The Missionary Position, Mother Theresa in Theory and Practice

Oh, that’s what Cumberdale meant? Mother Teresa’s idealization of suffering isn’t indicative of a sadistic god either. I didn’t think her Homes for the Dying counted as hospitals, either.

@Marley23

Would anti-gay views be “sweet cherries,” or is that just the belief of the fringe?

Depends on what you mean by anti-gay views. The idea that homosexuality is sinful, but that homosexuals should be loved? Or that homosexuals are evil and that God punishes those who tolerate them? The former is fairly mainstream, the latter isn’t.

@Marley23

I’d like to see some cites on how many people hold which beliefs, because I think you’re defining “mainstream” and “fundamentalist” in an arbitrary way.

Ok, I’ll see what I can find.

[QuickSilver]

@Human_Action

Pat Robertson is not representative of mainsteam American Christendom. There are certainly fundamentalists and fringe groups that interpret every word of the Bible literally (and others that try to prove it through pseudoscience), but their views are so different from mainstream Christians that it’s barely the same religion.

Are we now debating whether or not good Christians exist? Because I think we can all agree that good people exists in every walk of life. But you can’t use the No True Scottsman argument to disavow them from the facts that very bad things have been done on behalf of Christian religious tenets. Whether or not those bad things can be considered sadistic… well, I guess that’s a matter of whether one is on the giving or receiving end.

[Marley23]

@Human_Action

Mother Teresa’s idealization of suffering isn’t indicative of a sadistic god either.

I think you’re walking a very, very fine line with this argument.

I didn’t think her Homes for the Dying counted as hospitals, either.

Death with dignity is worth something, but I think the popular conception of Mother Teresa is that she did something to help the sick get well- not just help them die somewhere that wasn’t in the street. That’d be wrong. Given the choice, I think most people would rather support hospitals to help some people get well.

Depends on what you mean by anti-gay views.

Same here: this is a very, very fine line. “Homosexuality is sinful” isn’t any kind of Christian cherry and it’s not based on anything Jesus said.

[Human_Action]

Ok, here’s what I’ve found:

According to this article, 78.5% of Americans self-identify as Christian: 51.3% Protestant, 23.9% Roman Catholic, 3.3% Other Christian.

Per this poll from November 2012, only 37% of Americans believe that homosexual behavior is a sin.

Among Americans who attend religious service at least once a week , 61% responded that homosexuality was a sin.

Among Americans who describe themselves as “born-again, evangelical, or fundamentalist Christian”, 73% responded that homosexuality was a sin.
Are there other beliefs you want numbers on?

[Marley23]

I don’t need any other numbers. I need an explanation of how a view held by maybe a third of all U.S. Christians and a clear majority of people who go to church once a week is a fringe view. A fringe view is one held by a small minority of people, not a large chunk or a majority.

[Human_Action]

@QuickSilver

Are we now debating whether or not good Christians exist? Because I think we can all agree that good people exists in every walk of life. But you can’t use the No True Scottsman argument to disavow them from the facts that very bad things have been done on behalf of Christian religious tenets. Whether or not those bad things can be considered sadistic… well, I guess that’s a matter of whether one is on the giving or receiving end.

I hope not, I think we can accept it as a given.

Whether “very bad things have been done on behalf of Christian religious tenets” is a very different conversation from “Is God a sadist?”. I meant to suggest that practice and interpretation of the Christian God and Bible has such variance that the question can’t really be answered with a broad yes or no.

@Marley23

I think you’re walking a very, very fine line with this argument.

How so? The Bible states that believers “shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Some take this to mean that they should handle snakes. But, if you were to suggest that Christianity is a snake-handling religion, or that God wants people to be bitten by snakes…I don’t think that’s fair, because Christianity is so variable in doctrine and practice.

@Marley23

Death with dignity is worth something, but I think the popular conception of Mother Teresa is that she did something to help the sick get well- not just help them die somewhere that wasn’t in the street. That’d be wrong. Given the choice, I think most people would rather support hospitals to help some people get well.

Absolutely, the popular conception of Mother Teresa is mistaken.

@Marley23

Same here: this is a very, very fine line. “Homosexuality is sinful” isn’t any kind of Christian cherry and it’s not based on anything Jesus said.

When I repeated QuickSilver’s use of “sweet cherries”, I didn’t mean “things that are innately good”, but rather “ideas people like”. Like anything that’s survived for 2,000 years, Christianity is highly mutable. It supports a shockingly broad collection of denominations, practices, and beliefs. Christians that hate gays will use Christianity to support this hatred. Christians that don’t will use Christianity to support this tolerance.

People don’t want to stone their neighbors for not keeping the Sabbath, so they ignore that part. People do want to believe in an afterlife, so they keep that part. Thus, Christianity is as much about practice as it is about the Bible.

[Human_Action]

@Marley23

I don’t need any other numbers. I need an explanation of how a view held by maybe a third of all U.S. Christians and a clear majority of people who go to church once a week is a fringe view. A fringe view is one held by a small minority of people, not a large chunk or a majority.

It’s not a fringe view. I told you it wasn’t:

@Human Action

The idea that homosexuality is sinful, but that homosexuals should be loved? Or that homosexuals are evil and that God punishes those who tolerate them? The former is fairly mainstream, the latter isn’t.

[Marley23]

@Human_Action

How so?

Because of this:

@Human_Action

Sadism is “the derivation of pleasure as a result of inflicting pain, cruelty, degradation, or humiliation, or, watching such behaviors inflicted on others.”

@Human_Action

Mother Teresa’s idealization of suffering…

She wasn’t the first person to idealize suffering.

The Bible states that believers “shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Some take this to mean that they should handle snakes. But, if you were to suggest that Christianity is a snake-handling religion, or that God wants people to be bitten by snakes…I don’t think that’s fair, because Christianity is so variable in doctrine and practice.

Yes. That’s a fringe view.

When I repeated QuickSilver’s use of “sweet cherries”, I didn’t mean “things that innately good”, but rather “ideas people like”.

I don’t think that’s what QuickSilver was talking about. He was saying you’re picking ideas that support your view and ignoring the fact that a lot of people believe otherwise. I agree that religious beliefs evolve and Christian views have certainly changed over time. That’s why fundamentalism got started, of course.

@Human_Action

It’s not a fringe view. I told you it wasn’t:

So this wasn’t really true, then, was it?

@Human_Action

That’s what modern Christianity is, the sweet cherries: the words and works of Christ, and a social club. You have to go to the fringes if you want to be preached to about slaves obeying their masters, stoneing people, unbaptized babies writhing in hellfire, or Joshua’s conquests.

[simster]

@Human_Action

Whether “very bad things have been done on behalf of Christian religious tenets” is a very different conversation from “Is God a sadist?”. I meant to suggest that practice and interpretation of the Christian God and Bible has such variance that the question can’t really be answered with a broad yes or no.

What people do in the ‘name of God’ is inherently different than the things that have been attributed to God’s direct action(s) and commandments as recorded in his “Holy Book”.

The flood -

The Plague(s) -

Joshua’s Orders (and a multitude of other wars that God ordered be done) -

Condemning all of humankind to Hell (debatable, but …) due to teh actions of his first creations -

These are all actions that describe a vengeful and petty god that seems to take pleasure in the death and destruction of others that disagree with him or his “chosen people” .

Since alot of misery is associated with “God’s plan” - it must follow that the majority of his followers think that “God’s plan” requires misery - and since ‘God’ is omnipotent and omniscient, he not only has the power to prevent said misery, he must take some ‘pleasure’ in it happening since it is ‘his plan’.

QED - ‘God’ is a sadist -