Agnostic.com

16 19

Anyone who claims to know what god wants you to do is clearly lying.
This is true whether god exists or not.
Because it is impossible to prove the existence of god, any useful ethical framework cannot require the existence of god.

JimBen 5 Jan 9
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

16 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

2

The idea of god has been used as justification for crimes against humanity for a long time. They claimed that their god told them to do it.

Either that or the neighbors dog.

3

So true... They are merely just regurgitating what they and their predecessors were fed for generations.

Cheese and rice?

@PondartIncbendog Maybe... depends on the culture.

1

These procrastinators, have had two thousand years to prove anything.
They haven't proven shit bro!!! (sorry, went apeshit there)

1

I don’t see why it’s impossible to prove god exists the same way we prove anything else exists.

All I can say is that the answer is in the Feynman lectures.

@JimBen Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe.

2

It's funny that these people who believe they are doing what this god wants can look at others saying the same thing, but with whom they disagree, and will say that the other person only "thinks" they are doing what this god wants.

Hypocrisy is remarkably unselfaware.

If "god" knew what I was thinking about him, I'd have been hit by lightning long ago.

Or maybe god just laughs.

2

That's a very nice summation of the basic epistemological problem. One might better say, no useful ethical framework can assume the existence of god or really of any sort of externally bestowed, and/or inherent morality. Nothing based on an alleged supernatural being or realm can be a legitimate basis for ethics. Nor can it tie ethics to actual benefits and harms of actual actors, which is the only thing that will make an ethical system actually useful and effective.

2

This is, in a sense, what Immanuel Kant concluded in his Transcendental Dialectic. He showed that our minds only ever see the appearances of objects and not objects in themselves so God could never be seen or proved. But belief is another thing, and believing that ethics come from God and create social order is a matter of faith and not a given. Kant remained a nominal Christian for the sake of that social order.

6

As far as I'm concerned, anyone who claims to know what any god wants is clearly delusional, and needs immediate professional mental health assistance.

Think of the demand for mental health professionals.

@JimBen Yeah, but they'd have to be non-believers, too.
Wouldn't be terribly effective if they were believers, would it??
😉

God wants apple pie, I told ya.

@PondartIncbendog I just made lemon/cream cheese frosting for the lemon cupcakes I'm planning to bake tomorrow.
Does that count?
😉

@KKGator Why do you have to tell me that? You and that hiker woman have to bring food to a god fight?

@PondartIncbendog Well, at least food actually exists.

😀

@KKGator That's true! Don't tell her I called her "that hiker woman".
She could beat the lemons out of me.

@PondartIncbendog Ain't gonna hear it from me!
LOL

3

Assertions built on assertions. I find it an interesting exercise when listening to Christian accounts where they get really pushy about what must be true. Well, the ressurection MUST be true because people could have disavowed it. At the same time recognizing there are zero complete fragments of their claims from the time, and the only people invested in preserving anything would be the people claiming its true. The records of people who called bullshit would have been preserved by who?

Or claiming Tacitus .. followed by an explanation of how thorough and rigid a historian he is.... validates Jesus. Um no.. there is nothing in his claim that indicates he investigated it at all... so it is merely a reporting of hearsay... Christians say they believe this... which validates what those Christians believed, but NOT the claims.

So listen for the points where they make these claims.. not just what God wants you to do, but whether god was involved in something at all!! I listened to a pastor account how he was having challenges while selling his home to move on to his next flock. And out of the blue god provided a parishioner who wanted to give him free windows for his home... oh my... If a god were not involved, how would you determine this? And God picks favorites to give you windows... but anyone else sitting in that church struggling... well? And they eat it up!!

6

I would add delusional to your first sentence. I have known Christians that are totally convinced that your life is already mapped out for you by God. No amount of argument could sway them, and I’ve attended special public welcome nights at the local University highlighting debates on this subject and others like creationism vs evolution. It’s all in the bible according to them.

I know people so dumb that they claim the book of Revelation holds a history of all things past and present and this includes inventions and wars.

Delusional applies to all that claim to believe in the bible

4

In the beginning people create God in their own image. I think it is an ego thing.

0

Anyone? 100% of the time? There's no option but to be lying?
Let's think about this for a little bit.
How do you know what those people are thinking? Are you psychic? You would either have to be psychic, or you're lying about knowing that they are lying. But they could be a third option... You could be mistaken, right?
I always say that there's not enough evidence to justify an existence of a god. Not that there's no god, and that anybody who says there is a god, is clearly lying.
God could still exist, whether or not I have enough evidence to prove his existence to myself. I don't know what other people thinks when they say that they believe, and the evidence they have. People can believe 100%, without a shadow of a doubt, that they are sure they're completely truthful about a statement they say, but still be wrong or mistaken.
People needs to be careful how they say certain statements, Christian and atheist alike, because the way they phrase the statements are sometimes wrong. So just be careful about how you approach statements people says, is all I'm saying.
I hope this helps. Have a good day!

Sorry, I like the OP better, simpler & less words. I trust simply stated stuff, and I think you are just using semantics to twist things.

@AnneWimsey god is real... That's a simple stated statement. Do you trust it?

@AnneWimsey, @Allamanda I did read the second sentence, and everything is the same whether or not god existed. The problem is with the claim that everyone that claim to know want god wants you to do is clearly lying. There's no way that he knows the mind of everyone that says that, to know they're lying. That's what I was saying.

@Allamanda, @AnneWimsey I'm not twisting anyone's words. I'm just stating that he couldn't know what he stated to know.

@godlessinal ohferpetessake....stop cherry-picking!

@Leontion it is not a matter of your, or anyone's Opinion as to their veracity, it is Prima Facie because there is no gawd/s so that claiming you know the thoughts of a nonexistent entity is Obviously a lie!

@Leontion objectively, it IS lying....do we excuse the guy who kills his mother because he believes she is Satan?

@Leontion thank you for your thoughts.

@Leontion I asked if you/we EXCUSE the person, not do we "understand them" ....they are clearly lost in a lie!

@Leontion if you "excuse" them what is your justification for keeping them "hospitalized" for life? Obviously you are Explaining their behavior, not excusing it. Entirely different, no?

4

... for blessed are the deluded.

Ahmmm............Thank you.

1

How do you say it is impossible to prove I exist? How do you prove I have not eaten a taco?

What ever you think is God, non-existent flying spaghetti monster sky God, may truely be impossible to prove the existence thereof.

Just because you cannot prove Willy Wanka God or Harry Potter God does not mean I don't exist.

Word Level 8 Jan 10, 2020

(Thinks: Where did I put that vat of pasta sauce? I could do with eating a Word or two right now.)

All I can say is, the answer is in the Feynman lectures.

@JimBen yes, physics has something to do with my existence.

I hear tell of other gods who don’t get hung up on their own egos and have an easier time understanding the point.
Whether those gods or any gods exist, I cannot say.
But any system of rules that are predicated on the existence of any god is fundamentally flawed.

@JimBen if you notice in picture, it refers to deity of the banking world. Aside from the fact Daniel Boone deity and Kit Carson deity existing, the banking world is very well flawed rules as you say because their banking rules are made to enrich themselves with lots of money while oppressing the masses.

2

They could be lying, sure, but you're leaving out other more common possibilities.

For instance, they could be self-deceived - either as a result of mental illness or hallucination or some other delusion. Or, most often, it is because they themselves have been indoctrinated by some 3rd party and therefore believe via proxy what god wants.

I differentiate those conditions from a simple lie because I feel a lie is intentional and delusion is not necessarily so.

Nice nuance, but I think that the logical argument 'jimben' makes is still good whatever term you use for falsehood.

@Fernapple If you're not concerned with being specific enough about your meaning, sure. Close enough, right? Except that the distinction between intentionally lying and merely being wrong is pretty damned important if one is interested in intellectual honesty, and/or in portraying an honest assessment of the thing we're complaining about.

@Shawno1972 Quite. I am all for nuance, most conflict is about being more willing to argue than take the time to consider nuance. But I think that the nuance here, is that it was Jimben's second line which was the important one, containing his original insight, not the first which he probably wrote glibbly.

@Fernapple He may have only meant the first line glibly. I do not have evidence for that nor does anyone else likely to read his words, given how difficult such intent can be to determine based on mere language. Pedantry might not always be appreciated, but for the sake of clarity I do like to make important distinctions where they seem to me to be warranted. If you take no issue with that then I'm not sure why we're having the conversation. Not that it isn't fun. 🙂

@Shawno1972 Well it is fun and I do love pedantry. May be me just miss reading him, but the first line did seem to be banal on its own.

9

God wants apple pie. That is why he told the snake to threaten Eve.
God wants all the apples for himself. Asshole Apple hoarders.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:447756
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.