My objections to the claim of God's perfection

[Harbal]

By the way, atheists don't reproduce particularly much.

Silly comment.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/1 ... 1211031320

This study proposes and explores a new fertility determinant: societal secularism. Using country-level data from multiple sources (n = 181) and multilevel data from 58 countries in the World Values Survey (n = 83,301), the author documents a strong negative relationship between societal secularism and both country-level fertility rates and individual-level fertility behavior. Secularism, even in small amounts, is associated with population stagnation or even decline absent substantial immigration, whereas highly religious countries have higher fertility rates that promote population growth. This country-level pattern is driven by more than aggregate lower fertility of secular individuals. In fact, societal secularism is a better predictor of highly religious individuals’ fertility behavior than that of secular individuals, and this pattern is largely a function of cultural values related to gender, reproduction, and autonomy in secular societies. Beyond their importance for the religious composition of the world population, the patterns presented in this study are relevant to key fertility theories and could help account for below-replacement fertility.

Stop giving me stuff to read, will you? What's wrong with you, man?

[Age]

If one only 'respects' because of 'fear', then here is a prime example of more Wrong doing.

Maybe the police should also stop using force? By the way, when they do, all the shops close.

Retail giant closes 9 stores in liberal cities as theft reaches crisis point

Are you trying to argue for punishment or against punishment here?

But I am now just wondering where did you get the 90% of the word population figure from, exactly?
Also, 90% is obviously an absolutely False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect figure.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/374 ... -religion/
Atheist: 14.4%
Religious: 85.6%
So, approximately 90%.
By the way, atheists don't reproduce particularly much.

you completely and utterly missed my point here, as well.

[Mindwave]

Is it only so-called "christians" who claim this?

What personal reason do you have for thinking that 'God' is male gendered?

I was referring specifically to the Christian God.

Could it possible that you have a misinterpretation here?

Also, did not see the contradiction in 'your interpretation' here?

Some Christians think unsaved sinners are annihilated, while other Christians think unsaved sinners suffer eternally. So, that means there are 2 views of punishment: annihilation and eternal torment. I never said a Christian has both views or that an unsaved sinner is given both punishments because saying so would be contradictory.

But what would it matter if they 'change their ways'? you have already interpreted and claimed that they have been 'erased from existence' anyway. If they have 'changed their ways', then 'where' could they now be sent to, exactly?

No, I haven't. I simply pointed out that, in order for torment in hell to be a loving punishment, it must last until those sinners repent.

[Age]

Is it only so-called "christians" who claim this?

What personal reason do you have for thinking that 'God' is male gendered?

I was referring specifically to the Christian God.

But there is not so-called "male christian god".

Could it possible that you have a misinterpretation here?

Also, did not see the contradiction in 'your interpretation' here?

Some Christians think sinners are annihilated, while other Christians think sinners suffer eternally. So, that means there are 2 views of punishment: annihilation and eternal torment. I never said a Christian has both views or that an unsaved sinner is given both punishments because saying so would be contradictory.

I never thought nor said you did. I only asked you, Could it be possible that you have a misinterpretation here? And,

Did you not see the contradiction in 'your interpretation' here? Only.

But what would it matter if they 'change their ways'? you have already interpreted and claimed that they have been 'erased from existence' anyway. If they have 'changed their ways', then 'where' could they now be sent to, exactly?

No, I haven't. I simply pointed out that, in order for torment in hell to be a loving punishment, it must last until those sinners repent.

I know. And, I just asked you, 'where' could they 'now' be sent to, after 'repent'?

[godelian]

I was referring specifically to the Christian God.

According to Christian beliefs, God came down to earth and visited us for a few decades using a human body before leaving again, back to his transcendental destination.

This episode on earth -- which is indeed a Christian-only belief -- does not change the fundamental nature of God. It is still the same God as the God of Jews and Muslims.

Even for Christians, God is currently transcendental-only.

If he was ever on earth as a human, today he no longer is.

Seriously, if he is still on earth in a human body, please, show me where exactly.

Therefore, the practice of balkanizing the God of Abraham into factional versions with separate identities is needlessly divisive.

There can only be one Creator of the heavens and the earth, regardless of whether he truly visited us in human form on earth two thousand years ago.

[LuckyR]

Omniscient, omnipotent and all powerful gods (or any other entities) have problems with their internal logic, I agree.

How could you possibly make this claim? You don't know what their internal logic is.

If you knew you'd be a more omniscient/omnipotent god yourself.

Ha ha, nice one. I didn't originate the idea, thinking individuals have found those concepts self contradictory for millenia.

[Skepdick]

Omniscient, omnipotent and all powerful gods (or any other entities) have problems with their internal logic, I agree.

How could you possibly make this claim? You don't know what their internal logic is.

If you knew you'd be a more omniscient/omnipotent god yourself.

Ha ha, nice one. I didn't originate the idea, thinking individuals have found those concepts self contradictory for millenia.

Yes, the misinterpretation is indeed self-contradictory.

But again, that's the point. The interpretation is not self-contradictory...

[LuckyR]

How could you possibly make this claim? You don't know what their internal logic is.

If you knew you'd be a more omniscient/omnipotent god yourself.

Ha ha, nice one. I didn't originate the idea, thinking individuals have found those concepts self contradictory for millenia.

Yes, the misinterpretation is indeed self-contradictory.

But again, that's the point. The interpretation is not self-contradictory...

Well, you do bring up a good point, namely that the metaphysical is inherently subjective.