Why are athiests so hated in the USA?

[101A]

I agree.

101A was implying that God wants us to see evil because he (101A) wants his kids to see how bad some others have it.

Twisting my words; It's not that I want my dids to see how tough it is for others, it's that my kids cannot see how good they have it - it's nearly impossible for them to do so; perspective is powerful. I don't have the means, or desire, however to support them indefinitely, so at some point they WILL experience a struggle.

[101A]

If you could see the future and saw that your future kid was going to be a murderer whose destiny was going to be life in prison, would you still try to conceive the kid?

...conceiving kids is pretty fun...

[101A]

Pre-destination.

If you could see the future and saw that your future kid was going to be a murderer whose destiny was going to be life in prison, would you still try to conceive the kid?

Pre-destination also can be an argument against the existence of free will.

I never said "predestination". Your word. I just said that the all knowing creator, in turning us loose in a world run by Satan probably figured we'd do some bad stuff.

[Blake]

They don't think so....some real tortured sermons I've heard over the years....

I've heard countless sermons of preachers talking about good people going to .

I don't think it is, and he's not.

If god is judging you based on his inferiority complex instead of your works, that's absolutely an asshole move.

[Blake]

I never said "predestination". Your word. I just said that the all knowing creator, in turning us loose in a world run by Satan probably figured we'd do some bad stuff.

I'm saying you defined pre-destination.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

which again, is obviously peculiar to Christians

(eye roll)

What difference does it make whether or not other groups do that too other than to point out that most people are full of and lie as a matter of course?

You do not deny the position just state that other groups do it too as if that is some sort of justification.

[Blake]

Twisting my words; It's not that I want my dids to see how tough it is for others, it's that my kids cannot see how good they have it - it's nearly impossible for them to do so; perspective is powerful. I don't have the means, or desire, however to support them indefinitely, so at some point they WILL experience a struggle.

Then I fail to see your comparison since God does have the means for indefinite support.

No need for earth.

[Blake]

lol some would say. you won't get off that hobby horse.

lol Christian doctrine would say

lol your hobby is talking about me

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I disagree. God most liekly doesn't want man to sin, but if he makes it easy, then it's a worthless task. It's a challenge in order to test the mettle of individuals. Why he tests some, who knows. (Again, I'm going by the idea that God is rational, and not the crazy jealous OT God.

I personally find the notion that God 'chooses' to be anthropocentric claptrap just a shade better than the Greeks and ancient hebrews attributing emotional responses to their gods.

[Blake]

Unless your point is that "well, since is illogical, it must not exist, therefore God does not exist, and you all are idiots".

The doctrine of Christian salvation is illogical, therefore the Bible is crap. Zealots are idiots.

[Blake]

seems like you'd have a little more to say about them if that was true

Since you don't know me, I can take this to mean you think you always gab to the board about all the things/ people in life that fascinate you?

Doubtful, imo.

[Wild Cobra]

101...

What do you think of Christmas, since it's a hijacked Pagan holiday, we practice adorning a tree with tinsel, which is specifically prohibited by Jehovah?

[Blake]

Fair points.

I guess the larger issue I have is this: I don't know who's more stupid - Christians who take every word of the bible literally - or "atheists" (for lack of a better word) who take issue with the bible's "logic" because they read the bible literally.

Which parts of the Bible should a Christian take literally?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

God most liekly doesn't want man to sin

The bible advocates slavery and beating your children with rods, if god has anything to do with that book he really isn't averse to sin at all.

[vy65]

the parts about slaves, and being eaten by whales, and 7 headed dragons ...

do you also think a rabbit and a turtle really had a race several thousand years ago?

[Blake]

the parts about slaves, and being eaten by whales, and 7 headed dragons ...

do you also think a rabbit and a turtle really had a race several thousand years ago?

Which parts of the Bible should a Christian take literally?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

the parts about slaves, and being eaten by whales, and 7 headed dragons ...

do you also think a rabbit and a turtle really had a race several thousand years ago?

But John 3:16, that part you take at face value right because ghost man in the sky agreeing with a priest class's after the fact dictation of law and subsequent leniency for agreeing as well just makes so much sense.

We'll ignore Paul's specific edicts concerning women and slaves but we will choose his other edicts that jive with what we want to do or that will benefit us.

The Bible is apparently Choose Your Own Adventure now.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

It's funny how Christians used the bible to justify slavery, then after the country woke and realized that slavery was wrong, they say that the part about slavery "Isn't meant to be taken literally."

[vy65]

But John 3:16, that part you take at face value right because ghost man in the sky agreeing with a priest class's after the fact dictation of law and subsequent leniency for agreeing as well just makes so much sense.

We'll ignore Paul's specific edicts concerning women and slaves but we will choose his other edicts that jive with what we want to do or that will benefit us.

The Bible is apparently Choose Your Own Adventure now.

huh?

[vy65]

Where did I say a Christian should take any of it literally? You're the one obsessed with whether burning lakes are real or not.

[Blake]

We'll ignore Paul's specific edicts concerning women and slaves but we will choose his other edicts that jive with what we want to do or that will benefit us.

The Bible is apparently Choose Your Own Adventure now.

Paul: best troll job ever

[redzero]

So we could exercise free will; If you love something, set it free; kind of idea.

Why couldn't free will be exercised in heaven? Or is there no free will in heaven?

[redzero]

mysterious, isn't it?

I prefer the term "illogical."

[Blake]

Where did I say a Christian should take any of it literally? You're the one obsessed with whether burning lakes are real or not.

So we agree that none of the Bible should be taken literally.
It wasn't clear in your original post.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Where did I say a Christian should take any of it literally? You're the one obsessed with whether burning lakes are real or not.

Hey if I am reading Job or Kings then fine I can go with that. Its a story to take meaning from. What I am talking about are the books of edicts like most of what Paul wrote or all the declaratives of the Levites and such.

Paul didn't say that women were a lake of fire he said in no uncertain terms that women were subordinate of men. How are we supposed to take a declarative like that figuratively?

Now thanks in no small part to the migration of southern evangelicals to the GOP in the late 1960s, we have this new brand of Christianity that you get in the US that picks and chooses to the point of absurdity.

If you don't take the Bible literally more power to you but that does not mitigate those that do on a case by case basis. Modern US Christianity is based on the ability to do so.