Why is uncertainty about the motives of one form of superintelligence terrifying, whilst, at the same time, uncertainty about the motives of another, omnipotent supernatural intelligence comforting? i.e. the “I don’t know God’s plan, but I sleep well knowing He has one” line of reasoning.
Christians believe that God is inherently good. “This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you: that God is light and in him is no darkness at all.”
You have to differentiate between the old and the new testament in Bible. God is good and caring derived from the new testament where Jesus God's son ultimately died for all our sins.
In the old testament God was hard and judging heartless, killing his creation through flood, wanting sacrifices, killed 1st borns, leveled two whole cities Sodom and Ghomora, and was in general an hardhearted God that you should fear.
That's what has been told me when I did the church courses as teen :)
But it was not meant as two gods, it's meant as the hard god father changed his mind seeing the son die for the humans. I always also think of Trinity - but I'm a bad Christian anyway. So thanks for pointing to Marcionism.
Sure. And The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins explains the logical problems with religion.
But, I don't see any dualism here, only a (baseless) accusation of such by monideas. In the old testament God was hard and cruel and he is much nicer in the new testament. Marcionism is the idea that they're separate gods, which is not what theGeatZhopa claimed.
That book has so many fallacies it's not even funny. Dr. Sami Ameri has a series responding to him, I found this clip with English subtitles: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mrciVb-ScE" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mrciVb-ScE
I'm always suspicious of people who put their titles too front and center. Sure Dr Sami Ameri has credentials but Professor Richard Dawkins, DPhil, FRS, FRSL has better.
I wonder what the Christians here think about Dr Ameri? I'm not convinced at all.
Most of us are atheistic with regards to most gods. Some of us just go a little farther...
This is an interesting 4-part book review discussing the issues you mention: <a href="https://reknew.org/2015/04/must-we-deny-biblical-infallibility-to-disarm-scripture-a-review-of-derek-floods-disarming-scripture-part-1/" rel="nofollow">https://reknew.org/2015/04/must-we-deny-biblical-infallibili... (the verse to keep in mind is Colossians 1:15)
Though, be prepared: it may not be a sufficiently satisfying answer (but then… you have Isaiah 45:15)
injidup · · focus · HN ↗
keane · · focus · HN ↗
theGeatZhopa · · focus · HN ↗
In the old testament God was hard and judging heartless, killing his creation through flood, wanting sacrifices, killed 1st borns, leveled two whole cities Sodom and Ghomora, and was in general an hardhearted God that you should fear.
monideas · · focus · HN ↗
theGeatZhopa · · focus · HN ↗
But it was not meant as two gods, it's meant as the hard god father changed his mind seeing the son die for the humans. I always also think of Trinity - but I'm a bad Christian anyway. So thanks for pointing to Marcionism.
tasuki · · focus · HN ↗
keane · · focus · HN ↗
tasuki · · focus · HN ↗
But, I don't see any dualism here, only a (baseless) accusation of such by monideas. In the old testament God was hard and cruel and he is much nicer in the new testament. Marcionism is the idea that they're separate gods, which is not what theGeatZhopa claimed.
za3faran · · focus · HN ↗
tasuki · · focus · HN ↗
I wonder what the Christians here think about Dr Ameri? I'm not convinced at all.
Most of us are atheistic with regards to most gods. Some of us just go a little farther...
za3faran · · focus · HN ↗
The point is to conveyhow Dawkins and his ilk have so many basic fallacies that they do not seem to be aware of.
The topic of the existence of God is not the topic of discussion here.
dingaling · · focus · HN ↗
Part of their theology even leaked into the Gospel ( John 1:1-15 ).
keane · · focus · HN ↗
Though, be prepared: it may not be a sufficiently satisfying answer (but then… you have Isaiah 45:15)