Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-12-2014, 07:54 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 07:24 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  110 % false. Nice try. Liar. We have defined it as CHILDREN SUFFERING.
I asked if YOU want children to suffer.
If you don't then it is "mutually binding", (and no one accepted that it HAS to be "mutually binding".)

Is there NO END to the mental gymnastics you religious fools will go to to attemot to make a non-existent deity look reasonable ?


No, benevolence in reference to God, or world creator, has been defined as not allowing meaningless suffering to exist. And this is what I don't agree with.

If I was a brilliant computer programmer and I created a world, inhabited by conscious beings, resembling the human experience, a world which I had the power to intervene and control, but for which I created programmed laws, that allows it to function primarily on its own. In this world of mine people suffer, and die, and there is meaningless suffering, but there's also, hope and love.

In this sense you can say that I created a world, a world that I desired to exist, in which suffering, meaningless and otherwise, existed. That I in fact desired this total portrait of the world, so in some sense you can say I desired suffering to exist, but I also desired love to exist, happiness to exist as well.

I can do this, without picturing myself as malevolent, or excluding the attribute of benevolence to me, to see myself as an author, who created a world of profound and monstrous beauty, tragic and hopeful, comprehendible and mysterious.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 07:57 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 07:37 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 05:15 PM)Hafnof Wrote:  He then argues a strawman that since we are all moral relativists we have no basis for calling anything good, and therefore no basis for describing someone as benevolent or not benevolent. Even if he were to agree that there is a god-independent standard for "good" he can claim that god knows more about that standard than we do, and his actions are likely to be consistent with the standard in a way that we can't understand due to the timeframe and perspective we inhabit.

You seem to have it all wrong. The moral relativist does have a basis for calling something good, but this is relative. For him to call something good, is in essence no different that calling a particular dish, film, song, good. When he claims something is good, he is merely stating his own personal preference.


Quote:Even if he were to agree that there is a god-independent standard for "good" he can claim that god knows more about that standard than we do.

No, if could agree on a standard of good, than we could say that this person, or this god doesn't meet it. The problem is we don't agree on this standard. Folks here hold a standard that meaningless suffering negates benevolence, while theist don't.

In fact this view is one I would equally apply to God, or some brilliant computer programmer who was able to replicate human existence in a computer program. If meaningless suffering existed in this program of his, I wouldn't be able to accuse the programmer of not being benevolent on this alone.

Pointless suffering doesn't disprove a deity, it points to no intelligent agency whatsoever. It also defies biblical descriptions of a benevolent god, unless god killing a lot of people and describing himself as good qualifies as benevolent.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 07:59 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 07:45 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Completely irrelevant and false analogy. Yeah, you have an omnipotent loving god. Sure you do. Idiot.

Is it irrelevant this? How about answering this, can we accuse the programmer for being malevolent, because he allows suffering and death to exist in his replicated world?

I'm pretty sure you can see why he might not be, that he could in fact be a caring, and benevolent individual, but your dishonesty shields you from confessing this much,
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:02 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(08-12-2014 02:33 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 02:14 PM)unfogged Wrote:  I had said that it has been a problem within Christianity specifically because it still exists even within the framework of Christian beliefs.

So the belief that omnibenevolence is negated by the existence of meaningless suffering, is a Christian belief? It's a problem that only exists within the christian standard of benevolence?

Slick how you totally dodged the question by strawmanning my post: do you agree that Christianity internally recognizes the problem of evil?

Quote:It's pretty pathetic if you're an atheists appealing to empathy, or love, as if it were a God, a transcendent like authority, a master for whom we are to be slaves to. Perhaps you should come out of the closet and confess to being a god-bot.

I don't appeal to empathy as if it were a transcendent authority but then you can't seem to respond without making a strawman. Empathy is a common human emotion that atheists experience and is certainly a component in determining a rational ethical system unlike theism with has no ethical system other than divine command theory.

Quote:Folks here have defined benevolence, they define it to mean that meaningless suffering negates it,

The (non)act of permitting meaningless suffering is incompatible with the concept of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent god. That is just definitional. Your calling it a "grammatical" arguement and attempting to define benevolent to avoid the issue is just ridiculous.

Quote:The moral relativist does have a basis for calling something good, but this is relative. For him to call something good, is in essence no different that calling a particular dish, film, song, good. When he claims something is good, he is merely stating his own personal preference.

Assuming you are talking about somebody who doesn't accept that there is a divinely given objective set of morals and not an actual moral relativist, this is yet another strawman by equivocating on the word 'good'. Personal preferences are labelled 'good' but that is not the same as judging an action to be 'good' under an ethical system based on harm and benefits caused by that action.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:04 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 07:57 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  It also defies biblical descriptions of a benevolent god,

Apparently you haven't read the bible. The God of Love is something proposed by the writers of the new testament, based on the brutal murder of an innocent man, and an expectation they would suffer a similar fate, that suffering and pain where an important part of the world their loving God created, a God of subversive values, and doesn't fit so neatly into any sort of cozy liberal humanism.

So it doesn't defy the biblical description, it is in fact the biblical description. The sort of benevolence you have in mind, is not a description of the biblical God, and that should be pretty obvious.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:06 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 07:54 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I can do this, without picturing myself as malevolent, or excluding the attribute of benevolence to me, to see myself as an author, who created a world of profound and monstrous beauty, tragic and hopeful, comprehendible and mysterious.

You can attribute anything you like to yourself. Your god can call himself benevolent in it strokes his ego. The question is whether or not we can reasonably include benevolence, particularly omnibenevolence, in our list of attributes of such a creator.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:10 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 07:54 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(09-12-2014 07:24 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  110 % false. Nice try. Liar. We have defined it as CHILDREN SUFFERING.
I asked if YOU want children to suffer.
If you don't then it is "mutually binding", (and no one accepted that it HAS to be "mutually binding".)

Is there NO END to the mental gymnastics you religious fools will go to to attemot to make a non-existent deity look reasonable ?


No, benevolence in reference to God, or world creator, has been defined as not allowing meaningless suffering to exist. And this is what I don't agree with.

If I was a brilliant computer programmer and I created a world, inhabited by conscious beings, resembling the human experience, a world which I had the power to intervene and control, but for which I created programmed laws, that allows it to function primarily on its own. In this world of mine people suffer, and die, and there is meaningless suffering, but there's also, hope and love.

In this sense you can say that I created a world, a world that I desired to exist, in which suffering, meaningless and otherwise, existed. That I in fact desired this total portrait of the world, so in some sense you can say I desired suffering to exist, but I also desired love to exist, happiness to exist as well.

I can do this, without picturing myself as malevolent, or excluding the attribute of benevolence to me, to see myself as an author, who created a world of profound and monstrous beauty, tragic and hopeful, comprehendible and mysterious.

And so what if love or hope exist? What makes you determine it matters enough. In this case, you are using only some of the attributes you have at your disposal.

So to your standards, it takes very little to constitute benevolence. Congrats to you, that's why some people would say you have a very harmful social morality though.

Many here are aware Benevolent isn't an attribute to the Biblical God. But it was an attribute in classical definitions of some universal Gods and is an argument people these days, who believe in the biblical god, still use and claim is attributed to him.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:18 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 08:04 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(09-12-2014 07:57 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  It also defies biblical descriptions of a benevolent god,

Apparently you haven't read the bible. The God of Love is something proposed by the writers of the new testament, based on the brutal murder of an innocent man, and an expectation they would suffer a similar fate, that suffering and pain where an important part of the world their loving God created, a God of subversive values, and doesn't fit so neatly into any sort of cozy liberal humanism.

So it doesn't defy the biblical description, it is in fact the biblical description. The sort of benevolence you have in mind, is not a description of the biblical God, and that should be pretty obvious.

Of course, bloodthirsty genocide is benevolent. Requiring a human sacrifice to appease his anger is benevolent, torturing people forever whose only crime is not believing is benevolent. Praise Jeebus!

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
09-12-2014, 08:22 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 08:02 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Slick how you totally dodged the question by strawmanning my post: do you agree that Christianity internally recognizes the problem of evil?

Christianity doesn't recognize the problem of evil, stated as the existence of evil negates benevolence.

Quote:The (non)act of permitting meaningless suffering is incompatible with the concept of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent god.

Again, your stating something as a fact, when in isn't. By who or what's standard of benevolence are you making this judgement? Clearly it's not the standard that I or other, theists hold. So whose standard is it?

Quote:That is just definitional. Your calling it a "grammatical" arguement and attempting to define benevolent to avoid the issue is just ridiculous.

There is no issue for me, it's only an issue for you, and your definition and standard of benevolence.

Quote:Assuming you are talking about somebody who doesn't accept that there is a divinely given objective set of morals and not an actual moral relativist, this is yet another strawman by equivocating on the word 'good'. Personal preferences are labelled 'good' but that is not the same as judging an action to be 'good' under an ethical system based on harm and benefits caused by that action.

No, it's all the same, plenty of atheists know this as well. You can dress up morality all you like, but the end of the day for a moral relativist, good is no different than a personal preference.

The only reason folks such as yourself are blind to this, because you so emotionally attached to the idea of objective good and evil, that you can't part with it. If you were able to set aside your emotional attachments, this would be fairly obvious.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:33 AM
RE: Is Suffering Compatible With God's Existence?
(09-12-2014 08:22 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(09-12-2014 08:02 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Slick how you totally dodged the question by strawmanning my post: do you agree that Christianity internally recognizes the problem of evil?

Christianity doesn't recognize the problem of evil, stated as the existence of evil negates benevolence.

Quote:The (non)act of permitting meaningless suffering is incompatible with the concept of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent god.

Again, your stating something as a fact, when in isn't. By who or what's standard of benevolence are you making this judgement? Clearly it's not the standard that I or other, theists hold. So whose standard is it?

Quote:That is just definitional. Your calling it a "grammatical" arguement and attempting to define benevolent to avoid the issue is just ridiculous.

There is no issue for me, it's only an issue for you, and your definition and standard of benevolence.

Quote:Assuming you are talking about somebody who doesn't accept that there is a divinely given objective set of morals and not an actual moral relativist, this is yet another strawman by equivocating on the word 'good'. Personal preferences are labelled 'good' but that is not the same as judging an action to be 'good' under an ethical system based on harm and benefits caused by that action.

No, it's all the same, plenty of atheists know this as well. You can dress up morality all you like, but the end of the day for a moral relativist, good is no different than a personal preference.

The only reason folks such as yourself are blind to this, because you so emotionally attached to the idea of objective good and evil, that you can't part with it. If you were able to set aside your emotional attachments, this would be fairly obvious.

First of all.. not all atheists are morally relativist. Stop being ignorant in your arguments.

And when talking about the concept IF the god exist.. Morality of an objective essence attached to him or above him would most likely exist in this way. That's why atheists keep talking about good/bad in relation to God.

To ANY person alive in the world where an Omni-normal 3 plus Omnibenevolent God exists in... any moment that random person suffers to a point of wanting out of the situation... they are experiencing something that violates that God's existence. If you're actually going to try to defend Omnibenevolence and not just benevolence, you are at a shockingly dismissive state. Any points of suffering is what contradicts that God. That's why the ideas of Heaven some people have hold this type of world, where there is no suffering because God doesn't allow it. I would say there are some loopholes around the problem of Evil, but you don't seem to belief in that type of scenario.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: