Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-09-2013, 02:07 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
Quote: PJ, I can see why it would be important to not apply the morals [imaginary] god wants to apply to us. He wouldn't do very well.....

Um, the morals of god need not logically be the ones he applies to us. For example, Jesus said not to murder others, he never said, “Let someone kill you to save someone else (as he did).” God’s morals are refined and exalted. If you’d like to pick one to debate in the context of the suffering of innocents let’s talk about it rather than a slew of ideas on a disconnected video.

Thanks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:08 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
tl;dr

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:09 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
Quote: PJ, I can see why it would be important to not apply the morals [imaginary] god wants to apply to us. He wouldn't do very well.....

Um, the morals of god need not logically be the ones he applies to us. For example, Jesus said not to murder others, he never said, “Let someone kill you to save someone else (as he did).” God’s morals are refined and exalted. If you’d like to pick one to debate in the context of the suffering of innocents let’s talk about it rather than a slew of ideas on a disconnected video.

Thanks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:09 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
Quote:tl;dr

I like grumpy cat, but I find grumpy apatheists underscore the hope of eternity in Christ!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:13 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
Quote: Forum search to the rescue! Here is my "vigorous" defense of the "life is a gift" statement:

I definitely consider it a gift and I did say that in my first post; it is meaningful to me. But that only applies to me. For some, life is a horrible experience. I think where you struggle is accepting that I find meaning without a deity, god, or higher calling. I don't think we are important. I don't think the universe was created for us. I don't think the rest of the universe even knows we're here.

As you can see, my "defense" actually supports BB. Life is not a gift for all of us. Not even close. I've noticed that when we point out the "shit happens" aspects of life to you, you struggle to explain them and usually end up rephrasing them to something more manageable. Look at the contrast between your description of my "vigorous defense" and my actual comment. Go read the whole thread. It's like you're talking about a completely different thing.

I used to do the same thing as a theist; I understand why you do it.
I don’t struggle to explain how bad things have meaning. I think I struggle continually to point out the total failure of all atheists on this thread to have the guts to say any bad suffering has any meaning at all (!) because that starts to unravel the resolution being debated!

And, okay. YOU think life is a gift. OTHERS think life is a gift. Still others think it is a HORRIBLE EXPERIENCE.

So the ones who think it’s a gift are outraged at baby killing and the ones who think the meaning of life is cruel suffering understand why babies die. Do you see how this further affects the resolution we’re debating?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:20 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
Quote: Wrong. Obvious attempt to change the subject. Some children SUFFER for years.
Stop trying to change the subject, troll. YOUR JEBUS, (would he exist, and he doesn't), would permit that life-long suffering. THAT is no "loving god". They are mutually exclusive. ANy rational person can see that. Obviously you are not rational. (But we already knew that).

“Any rational person” can see that some suffering leads to exaltation, correction, rehabilitation and learning, etc. You work to discredit the sufferings of Jesus, are you now going to work to discredit the sufferings of Martin Luther King, of Ghandi, of people who risked their lives in The Holocaust and then suffered in the camps BECAUSE they were hiding other people? That’s disgusting and appalling. Shame on you. Of COURSE people suffer with good reason and those who suffered in the camps for saving others received a reward from god.

As for “loving god” and “suffering” being mutually exclusive you don’t know what love is. “Love gives, love suffers, love pines, love yearns.”

Quote:The scriptures don't need "to be proven wrong". You have the burden of proof, and you have in no way proven them "true" about anything. So indeed, you DO want me to lie, and say Jebus is Lard. You people really are into that lie telling. You really have a stupid god, who wouldn't know what's true or not true. Don't bother to call in the exorcists. (ANother fake job, just like your's). There are no demons.
Read Dr. Elaine Pagels' "The Origins of Satan".
You really wallow in ignorance, don't you ?

I’m still keenly aware that some type of possession (or pride!) is preventing you from acknowledging Jesus as Lord, even in this context. What are you afraid of? You’re afraid of typing 11 letters with 3 spaces between them?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:28 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
(03-09-2013 02:20 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I’m still keenly aware that some type of possession (or pride!) is preventing you from acknowledging Jesus as Lord, even in this context. What are you afraid of? You’re afraid of typing 11 letters with 3 spaces between them?

"You're a liar" only requires 10 letters Sleazy.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2013, 02:39 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
(03-09-2013 02:13 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I don’t struggle to explain how bad things have meaning. I think I struggle continually to point out the total failure of all atheists on this thread to have the guts to say any bad suffering has any meaning at all (!) because that starts to unravel the resolution being debated!

And, okay. YOU think life is a gift. OTHERS think life is a gift. Still others think it is a HORRIBLE EXPERIENCE.

Yup.

(03-09-2013 02:13 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  So the ones who think it’s a gift are outraged at baby killing and the ones who think the meaning of life is cruel suffering understand why babies die. Do you see how this further affects the resolution we’re debating?

That statement only works if it's true. I've experienced people who think contrary to what you've stated. You're also stating the suffering only as an action: 'killing babies' and 'babies dying at birth due to natural causes' are two very different things. The first, by a theist, is usually explained in the context of sin and free will. The second is the more challenging example that cannot be explained in the context of a loving god.

I only speak for myself here but you're absolutely right: there are times when bad suffering does have meaning. There's no conflict for me when I agree with that. I don't think that's the issue for everyone here. It's the meaningless suffering that conflicts with the description of a loving god.

What is meaningless suffering? Lives ended before birth (no, not abortion... no free-will here. Would you like to see a list of natural causes of death for unborn children?). SIDS. Fatal genetic birth defects.

You've addressed some suffering, but you've stayed well away from the bottom of the barrel. A short, painful life full of suffering makes no sense when an omnipotent god is in charge. What I originally interpreted as offensive was simply you trying to find something to make meaningless suffering coexist with your god.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like guitar_nut's post
03-09-2013, 02:40 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
[imaginary] god himself caused abortions when the pregnancy was believed to be caused from adultery. Read Numbers 5:11. You really need to learn the bible, it would help you be a better apologist. As a result, your bible provides no "moral basis" to critique people who get abortions whatsoever. Nice try.

But on what objective moral grounds shall I determine my morality? Definitely NOT the bible, since god can commit abortions as long as it favors a man, but if it favors a women in modern times, THEN its immoral. That's a double standard in favor of Patriarchy.

Oh, and I thought we were keeping emotionality out of the debate? You can feel moral indignation at what PEOPLE do, but we can't feel moral indignation on what GOD commands in the bible? How very peculiar, but telling.

Regarding what moral ethic do I use to judge god - the good. Things are good in and of themselves, without any reference to any outside objective moral being. We can discover this good by paying attention to the effect our actions have on others and on ourselves. As we increase our mindfulness every day in our experiences, we can know the levels of good in things through our experience with them. Because the things we experience are, in fact, outside ourselves, if someone is paying proper attention and mindful, they will understand the "good" in those things or interactions in an objective way. As a result, an objective moral code is possible.

Claiming that atheists have no moral grounds to judge god based on attributing the naturalistic fallacy to all atheists when most do not ascribe to naturalism as a basis for morality is pretty sophomoric. Survival of the Fittest is simply an observation as to the fact. This would be akin to saying "the fastest baseball player reaches first base first." It says NOTHING of the moral right or wrong of reaching first base first or being the fastest, if there is one.

Attributing the Naturalistic fallacy to all atheists is a pretty weak generalization. In my opinion Secular morality is FAR superior to religion-based morality.

If that's the point you might want to start a new thread. You've been destroyed on the concept of suffering in general - an omniscient god that created a "practice" world where we all suffer to "test" us to find out who will make it to "heaven," when he already knows the answer, is pretty sadistic - we do judge god and his actions are found wanting. If there is no god, then all this random suffering and excess suffering makes sense. No loving Omniscient Omnipotent being is looking out for us.

If you want to ask HOW we judge god, maybe you should start a thread asking how atheists have morals.

And yes I did pass the bar, first try, in the top 8% nationwide. Badow.

Don't sell yourself short Judge, you're an incredible slouch.

Martin Luther was the "father" of two movements - The Reformation and Nazism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Skippy538's post
03-09-2013, 02:44 PM
RE: Why Must Children Suffer? [The Astonishing Sequel]
Didn't we all prove your bible wrong when we DID type Jesus is Lord? How are you still on that ridiculous point? The bible said no man, but through the holy spirit, can speak those words. We did and proved the bible wrong. Do you ever see the other side of things or just keep chasing the same old haggard BS even when you know its not true?



Why do I even try? What a waste of time.

Don't sell yourself short Judge, you're an incredible slouch.

Martin Luther was the "father" of two movements - The Reformation and Nazism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: