A question on smart and dumb for dummies.
This clip on the birth of Mormonism is representative and a reasonably accurate portrayal of how all religions are born. This would apply to all creator Gods and other supernatural entities or forces. It posits that men are not quite the brightest light around and quite gullible as compared to women when deciding on the truth.
South Park Tells About the Foundation of Mormonism and Joseph Smith
Do you agree with the premise that in the case of religions, women would be less gullible than men and in that sense smarter than men?
Dumb men will only answer with a yes, no or a simple denial. Smart men will give a reason for their choice. The same would apply to women.
Theology and philosophy, religion and politics, are close in their natures as both seek the best rules to live by. You should recognize as you answer that your answer would apply to both politics and religion.
Would an omnipotent God be restricted to doing Good?
Scriptures have God doing many things, that without the Christian double moral standard, Christians would have to condemn God. Christians, as in Job and other places where God is shown to kill innocent babies and children, forgive God for what they would condemn people for doing. Christians say that God can do the immoral to us because he created us and owns us and can be an Indian giver of life because he gives it. An excuse I find repugnant.
If God is restricted to only doing good, then it cannot be said that he is omnipotent and all powerful?
We are commanded to place no one above God for any attribute. Yet it seems that in terms of being sinners and being the epitome of evil, we are all more powerful than God and would all put our names above his if he is restricted to doing Good.
Can God be omnipotent when restricted from doing evil?
Christians are more moral than God. So why do you worship him?
The Bible contains many instances that show God doing things that no moral human would do.
If you had Godís power, you would not use Genocide against man and beast on the earth. Jesus said he came to cure those in need, not kill them, so you would cure those in Noahís day and would not kill them all.
In Egypt, you would not harden Pharaohís heart but would leave it soft and let him let the Jews go. You would not punish the first born for what their parents did. If anything, you would punish the guilty and not the innocent.
To the many other instances where God ordered massacres of babies, you would not as your better morals would make you care or cure and not kill.
I have been speaking to many Christians and Muslims over the last few years and have noted that many grudgingly agree that God is rather barbaric but that they forgive him for all his less savory decisions and usually say they do so because God can do whatever he likes to us because he created us.
Christians and Muslim thus recognize their better morals. That being the case, why have you Christians and Muslims chosen to follow a God whose morals are inferior to your own?
Religions are supposed to be all about morals yet you seem to ignore that yours are better than Godís. Why do you do so?
Who ruled heaven on this day. God or Satan?
This quote speaks of God choosing Jesus as a human sacrifice to take our just punishment for our sins. Dogma says that we cannot redeem ourselves from God condemnation. 1Peter 1:20 0 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.
The above quote shows this as Gods first actual judgement as judge and shows the setting and accepting of a bribe or human sacrifice to corrupt his justice. That justice usually stated that only the punishment of the guilty was acceptable to justice and that it would be unjust to punish the innocent. The corruption of Godís usual justice is what the bribe or sacrifice of Jesus bought. Injustice.
Recognizing that by whatever name you would use, sacrifice, ransom, bribe or payment, would you say such an immoral request and legal injustice would most likely be demanded by a God or by a Satan?
If punishing the innocent is not a just and moral thing to do, I would say that Satan would be the one to ask or demand such a sacrifice.
That would have Satan ruling heaven and not God as a good God would not do such an immoral thing.
Do you agree that Satan is more likely to ask for us to accept an immoral human sacrifice to bail us out than God would?
If you agree, does that indicate that Satan was ruling in heaven and not God on that day?
Why do people think evil to be a problem when it is good?
Evil here I define as a premeditated negative actions against another.
IOW. People to people evil. Not natural or inadvertent evil from non-conscious sources.
As evolving creatures, all people do constantly is either compete or cooperate with each other.
People to people evil only occurs when people are competing for resources. This creates victims or losers while cooperation does not.
If we were to somehow eliminate the miniscule amount of evil in the world, manís evolution would stall and we would likely go extinct. Ee collectively would no longer be striving to produce the fittest of our species. It seems that competition makes us strong and not competing would make us weak.
That makes the minute amount of evil we see in people to people competition, --- a good thing, --- because if we ever eliminated it, the greater evil of our extinction would come to pass. In this sense, humanity is best served by embracing the minute amount of evils we produce by our competing.
Do you agree?
If not, please show how we can take competition out of our evolution and how we would not weaken our species to the point of extinction.