You don't have to say "model Christian" to imply it, because that's ambiguous and when "Christian" is said it should already refer to a model Christian. Also, I did not say debating the existence of God is a waste. I said debating in general is a waste of my own time. And please, leave your ad hominems at the door.
Hitler was a bad Christian considering all the churches ,temples,mosques,ect that he destroyed. Not to mention the millions of souls he sighned away but he was at one time christian.Although Hitler did not practice religion in a churchly sense, he certainly believed in the Bible's God. Raised as Catholic he went to a monastery school and, interestingly, walked everyday past a stone arch which was carved the monastery's coat of arms which included a swastika. As a young boy, Hitler's most ardent goal was to become a priest. Much of his philosophy came from the Bible, and more influentially, from the Christian Social movement. (The German Christian Social movement, remarkably, resembles the Christian Right movement in America today.) Many have questioned Hitler's stand on Christianity. Although he fought against certain Catholic priests who opposed him for political reasons, his belief in God and country never left him. Many Christians throughout history have opposed Christian priests for various reasons; this does not necessarily make one against one's own Christian beliefs. Nor did the Vatican's Pope & bishops ever disown him; in fact they blessed him! As evidence to his claimed Christianity, he said: "My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. -Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)
See now this is why I don't like discussing religion. The way I think it should be is, "I believe whatever I believe and don't care what you believe." But that's not the case. Religious tension is one of the biggest reasons for alot of this world's wars. Personally, I claim to be an Atheist, and I tend not to let the world know that because most of my friends are christian, catholic, jewish... ect. Alot of people don't accept my beliefs and I don't really care what they think. This is how I think the world should be, proud but accepting. I hate getting on the discusion of God because people will just end up trying to shove their religion down your throat and it's because everyone thinks they're right. No matter what they believe they think that they're right and everyone else is wrong. But personally, I don't think religious ties should matter since there is no proof of how we came to be or who the creater is or if there is one. We have theories, but if it isn't proof, alot of people will judge and just look for flaws in said theory. Anyway, I'm a proud Atheist that is strongly against the religious form of facism.
Who cares about a mortal life when an eternal one awaits? It's selfish not to shut up about yourselves and just never tell people about god. The reasoning is that if you tell people then they face consequences, whereas if you didn't tell people the only thing that would happen is that you have one less thing to talk about. Even if a person spent their lives wallowing in despair and horror it is INFINITELY better NOT to tell them about god because an INFINITE life of love, joy, fulfillment and happiness await whereas if you tell them and they deny god an INFINITE life of despair and horror falls upon them.
The only responsible action would be to get rid of religion entirely so everyone goes to heaven forever. This thread is for debating, not preaching your religious views.
I must intrude a final time. In a determined system (as you have stated yourself), certainly the "determinist" per se is an all powerful deity.. therefore that deity I do not think would logically allow himself not to be known across the universe(s)... it should be noted if such a deity were to exist (if there is or isn't) he would probably disclose himself, or have some sort of interval with a sentient race.
What? Really? Really? First of all that doesn't make sense. I'm not talking about god disclosing himself, I'm talking about people disclosing information about god to other people. Your point isn't a counter-point, it isn't even a point on top of my points, its just there. It is not a response in the most liberal sense of the word. As per your 'argument.' Why does he choose to disclose himself rather than to not disclose himself and how does he select who he discloses himself to? What argument logically purports that god must disclose himself? But let's say, just for the sake of argument, you're right. So what? That just means god doesn't fall into the category of noble for proselytizing himself and it gives me the opinion of him that he fancies himself far more important than he is.
Do you know the tooth fairy,Santa Clause,Easter bunny,and lepercauns don't disclose them selves either lol. God is Imaginary and is a folk tale told by ancient civilizations to deal with mortality and to promote morals and a belief system.
well you say this now but wait until judgement day when the dead shall walk the earth and rip the non-believers to shreds! and out of this chaos shall hell rise to the plains of earth and rule till the ends of time! that was wierd.....
My points are very relating. If an all powerful deity were never to disclose himself, people wouldn't be able to disclose information about him. God, let's say in the sense of the Christian God, would logically disclose himself at one point or another. Since the Christian God is omni benevolent, he would need something to show his love to. That's where we come in (proposed theory). Why wouldn't he be noble for prosyletizing himself? Because he wants to save you from eternal damnation? I can't find how that's not noble.
I believe in God and I will never be swayed. All those non-believers can argue all they want, desperate for attention and to not be the minority. But the truth is I don't care. Take ur own path and don't disrupt mine. Don't ruin it for others just because u feel left out. And don't get angry at people for their own beliefs. I am not trying to convince u that God exists but to state my dislike of the activist non-believers.
By calling people non-believers, you ARE trying to convince us that god exists. Also, don't say we're trying to ruin lives because we feel left out. By saying that, you're also saying that our beliefs are insignificant or wrong. Please don't post that crap here.
Then why are you here. I can tell you why. You are a self-loving prat who doesn't care about honest discussion but relies heavily, and almost exclusively, on the idea that you're right and everyone else is wrong. So you grab your empty bastion for your once present testicles and wave it around violently hoping that by a callous ignorance of the commentary of others and the constant spouting of your own self-indulgences people won't be able to see past your front. But I see you. I see every last inch of you and you want to know what you are? Well, I'll tell you regardless. You're just a **** with a keyboard. You're a dime a dozen and you are the stereotypical internet junkie. No one would care if you vanished from the face of the earth this minute, in fact, the world would be better off without you. You deserve no love, no respect and no pity. You are the epitome of everything that is an injustice in this world and a representation of this waste of a generation. **** you. Exactly! No one goes to hell then, unless they're genuinely evil. Which gives us a reason to be good for goodness sake! If God is both willing and able to prevent evil but does not then he is malevolent. Why is there evil if he is omnibenevolent? Quick note (do not use these arguments): Man caused evil to enter the world. - So what. It has nothing to do with the prevention of evil. God will destroy evil. - A delay is still malevolence. Because if you haven't heard the word of god you won't go to hell for being genuinely ignorant. Jesus ****ing Christ pay ****ing attention. I made this very plain and very clear. How ****ing inattentive are you?
Wooooow.... owned I Just have to comment on this post. Just... wow. You... you put him in his place =)
I understand what you're saying.. however, in my very first quote of your's I had said: "It would be logically insensible for an all powerful deity to not disclose himself." That answers that. As for malevolence, evil is required for there to be good. If there is no evil, there is no good, there only is. You need dirty for there to be clean. If nothing is dirty, then there is no clean, there only is. The opposite of something is required for something to exist. If there's no such thing as natural how can something be super natural? You probably see where I'm going with this.
That is not how that breaks down. If there is no evil, then there is only good. If there is no good, then there is only evil. Of course those two already represent a false dichotomy. That is merely a by-product of the human mind's love of duality. Everything is really a gradient.
How can there be good if there is no evil? Let's define "good" by morally correct, and "evil" as morally incorrect. If there was nothing morally correct, then everything would be morally incorrect (this is what you are saying). Take it as a scale. Let's propose a scale from 1-10 representing righteousness. 1 being the least righteous, and 10 being the most righteous. The scale has two weights on each end - one end with the devil (least righteous) and the other end with God (most righteous). Once either side falls off the scale, it is no longer a scale. Like you said, everything is a gradient, but when the opposing half of that gradient is taken away, what is the gradient, it just that one thing, but that one thing can't be defined because there is nothing opposing to define it. You are right in the sense that once evil is gone there is only good, however, good cannot be defined. It just is. Its like growing up not knowing any good manners. You don't know what bad manners are until you know good manners, you just do what it is.
Um, no... You just stated X, you didn't state why X behaves the way it does rather than behaving differently. Even if god did logically have to express himself then that would still make him "un-noble" because he proselytized himself. Explain why. Don't just state it. "If there's no such thing as natural how can something be super natural" God -> Supernatural. God -> Created natural. Without natural there is no supernatural. God -> could not exist by your logic. You're thinking is flawed.