Total Posts:51|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Problem of Evil

Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 9:47:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hey, what are your thoughts on the Problem of Evil? For my fellow atheists, please review my case refuting the PoE from my debate here: http://www.debate.org...
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 10:01:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 9:56:23 AM, drafterman wrote:
I think your forfeiture of the 16adams trial proves there is no god.

This is an ad hominem that has nothing to do with the thread.
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 10:46:50 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 10:01:44 AM, Microsuck wrote:
At 3/19/2012 9:56:23 AM, drafterman wrote:
I think your forfeiture of the 16adams trial proves there is no god.

This is an ad hominem that has nothing to do with the thread.

1. It's not an ad hominem. Ad hominem is not a synonym for "insult." An ad hominem is a fallacious attempt to associate the falsehood of some argument to some undesirable characteristic of the speaker. That is "You're wrong because you're X" where X is some undesirable characteristic. Ironically, the response "that's an ad hominem" is often an ad hominem itself. Also ironically, I was attempting to support your conclusion, not disprove it.

2. If what you did was an evil, then it has everything to do with the Problem of EVIL.
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 10:51:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 10:46:50 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 3/19/2012 10:01:44 AM, Microsuck wrote:
At 3/19/2012 9:56:23 AM, drafterman wrote:
I think your forfeiture of the 16adams trial proves there is no god.

This is an ad hominem that has nothing to do with the thread.

1. It's not an ad hominem. Ad hominem is not a synonym for "insult." An ad hominem is a fallacious attempt to associate the falsehood of some argument to some undesirable characteristic of the speaker. That is "You're wrong because you're X" where X is some undesirable characteristic. Ironically, the response "that's an ad hominem" is often an ad hominem itself. Also ironically, I was attempting to support your conclusion, not disprove it.

2. If what you did was an evil, then it has everything to do with the Problem of EVIL.

I'm talking about the problem of evil against God's existence.
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
Zaradi
Posts: 14,128
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 11:46:03 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 10:51:44 AM, Microsuck wrote:
At 3/19/2012 10:46:50 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 3/19/2012 10:01:44 AM, Microsuck wrote:
At 3/19/2012 9:56:23 AM, drafterman wrote:
I think your forfeiture of the 16adams trial proves there is no god.

This is an ad hominem that has nothing to do with the thread.

1. It's not an ad hominem. Ad hominem is not a synonym for "insult." An ad hominem is a fallacious attempt to associate the falsehood of some argument to some undesirable characteristic of the speaker. That is "You're wrong because you're X" where X is some undesirable characteristic. Ironically, the response "that's an ad hominem" is often an ad hominem itself. Also ironically, I was attempting to support your conclusion, not disprove it.

2. If what you did was an evil, then it has everything to do with the Problem of EVIL.

I'm talking about the problem of evil against God's existence.

Semantics. That was never specified in the OP, thus it was valid. :3
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 11:49:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 9:57:53 AM, wiploc wrote:
The logical PoE is bulletproof.

Please explain.

I have insofar encountered only terribly insufficient arguments supporting it.

I mean, it's tantamount to saying, "if there is a life-enabling, perceptively ubiquitous, and unalterable sun, then darkness is impossible."

Negative.

I notice that since I've begun studying physics, philosophy has become so much less interesting and logical; moreover, I seem to disagree with just about everyone. :\
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 12:37:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 10:51:44 AM, Microsuck wrote:
At 3/19/2012 10:46:50 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 3/19/2012 10:01:44 AM, Microsuck wrote:
At 3/19/2012 9:56:23 AM, drafterman wrote:
I think your forfeiture of the 16adams trial proves there is no god.

This is an ad hominem that has nothing to do with the thread.

1. It's not an ad hominem. Ad hominem is not a synonym for "insult." An ad hominem is a fallacious attempt to associate the falsehood of some argument to some undesirable characteristic of the speaker. That is "You're wrong because you're X" where X is some undesirable characteristic. Ironically, the response "that's an ad hominem" is often an ad hominem itself. Also ironically, I was attempting to support your conclusion, not disprove it.

2. If what you did was an evil, then it has everything to do with the Problem of EVIL.

I'm talking about the problem of evil against God's existence.

So am I.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 2:50:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 11:49:58 AM, Ren wrote:
At 3/19/2012 9:57:53 AM, wiploc wrote:
The logical PoE is bulletproof.

Please explain.

I wrote a long and detailed post in response to this. I couldn't post it. The web site said I had a profanity in it somewhere. I tried to find the "profanity," but failed. I started a new thread, to post my post there, one paragraph at a time, to find the objectionable part. But, by the time I got the thread going, I had lost the post that was to go here.

Sorry.

I may get back to it later.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 3:44:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
If there is an all loving God then evil cannot logically exist.

Also, theists say that free will solves the problem of evil (it doesn't). What all loving God would give beings free will he knew were going to do evil? I mean, if you knew a jail bird was going to re-offend would it be moral to set him free?

Basically, God giving humans free will was evil in the first place. Why give people you know are going to do evil free will?

The POE cannot be touched. It doesn't disprove God, but it disproves an all loving God at least.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 3:45:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 2:50:34 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 3/19/2012 11:49:58 AM, Ren wrote:
At 3/19/2012 9:57:53 AM, wiploc wrote:
The logical PoE is bulletproof.

Please explain.

I wrote a long and detailed post in response to this. I couldn't post it. The web site said I had a profanity in it somewhere. I tried to find the "profanity," but failed. I started a new thread, to post my post there, one paragraph at a time, to find the objectionable part. But, by the time I got the thread going, I had lost the post that was to go here.

Sorry.

I may get back to it later.

That is very unfortunate.

I look forward to your next attempt.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 3:50:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
If I see a rape I don't think "Oh well, he has free will" I think "I'm taking away this sicko's freedom to carry out is will right now!".

If there is an all loving God, he would feel the same and act on it.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 3:50:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 3:44:17 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
If there is an all loving God then evil cannot logically exist.

Why not?

Also, theists say that free will solves the problem of evil (it doesn't).

Not sure what you mean by "the problem of evil."

"Evil" is not a thing in and of itself as it relates to God (or anything, really). Lik darkness (an oft made comparison), evil is the absence of something.

Thus, it is absurd to use an ideological entity to attempt to disprove its existence.

What all loving God would give beings free will he knew were going to do evil? I mean, if you knew a jail bird was going to re-offend would it be moral to set him free?

God made humans because He was lonely. What's the purpose of creating a bunch of puppets when you're lonely? Couldn't we then have satisfying and functional relationships with stuffed animals? We can't even maintain healthy relationships exclusively with animals.

We need someone or something with at least a comparable degree of sentience, whether individually or collectively. In the Bible, it's suggested that our near-equivalence is met through a comparison between aggregate God and aggregate man.

Basically, God giving humans free will was evil in the first place. Why give people you know are going to do evil free will?

Because you accept them anyway. It's the same reason we come to trust people when we know everyone has lied before.

The POE cannot be touched. It doesn't disprove God, but it disproves an all loving God at least.

It doesn't disprove a thing but the ubiquity of seamless logic in philophical discourse.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 3:51:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
In other words:

Loneliness + perfection + the incapacity to copy one's self + love = creating imperfect beings with free will.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 4:00:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Alright, NO ONE has given me a good response to this yet:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 4:10:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 3:50:12 PM, Ren wrote:
At 3/19/2012 3:44:17 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
If there is an all loving God then evil cannot logically exist.

Why not?

Also, theists say that free will solves the problem of evil (it doesn't).

Not sure what you mean by "the problem of evil."

"Evil" is not a thing in and of itself as it relates to God (or anything, really). Lik darkness (an oft made comparison), evil is the absence of something.

Thus, it is absurd to use an ideological entity to attempt to disprove its existence.

What all loving God would give beings free will he knew were going to do evil? I mean, if you knew a jail bird was going to re-offend would it be moral to set him free?

God made humans because He was lonely. What's the purpose of creating a bunch of puppets when you're lonely? Couldn't we then have satisfying and functional relationships with stuffed animals? We can't even maintain healthy relationships exclusively with animals.

We need someone or something with at least a comparable degree of sentience, whether individually or collectively. In the Bible, it's suggested that our near-equivalence is met through a comparison between aggregate God and aggregate man.

Basically, God giving humans free will was evil in the first place. Why give people you know are going to do evil free will?

Because you accept them anyway. It's the same reason we come to trust people when we know everyone has lied before.

The POE cannot be touched. It doesn't disprove God, but it disproves an all loving God at least.

It doesn't disprove a thing but the ubiquity of seamless logic in philophical discourse.

Nothing you said made any sense.

"Why not?"

If there is an all God, there can be no evil (look up the word "all", how do you plan to fit evil in there if he is all loving?).

"evil is the absence of something"

Oh, so if there is an absence of a knife to this woman's throat then I'm evil? You can't really believe the nonsense you type, do you?

"God made humans because He was lonely."

There are two options, either:

1) God's loneliness is a flaw, therefore God is not perfect.

2) God's loneliness is not a flaw, therefore having no reason to create humans.

What perfect being would have petty ape like problems like loneliness in the first place anyway? I'm amazed at what I'm reading from you..

"What's the purpose of creating a bunch of puppets when you're lonely?"

God made us so no matter how much will we have, we cannot read other people's minds, but we can murder people at will. It's clear God created us limited or else we would be Gods, so if God took away other abilities, he could have taken away our ability to be evil. If we would be puppets because God stopped us from doing something, then I guess we are puppets because God is stopping us from being able to read minds with your fallacious logic.

"In the Bible, it's suggested that our near-equivalence is met through a comparison between aggregate God and aggregate man."

The same book also suggests that serpents can talk and that people can split seas in half, I don't think The Bible is a good source to get valid information from.

"Because you accept them anyway. It's the same reason we come to trust people when we know everyone has lied before."

So you believe it's moral for every human to be free to do whatever their will leads them? If you saw a rape, you would just let it happen because the rapist has free will? Your arguments are not only weak, but make you come off as kind of sadistic I'm afraid. God would be evil for giving beings he knew would do evil free will. If I knew that beings were going to do evil if I gave them free will, I wouldn't do it. I am clearly morally superior to your God.

So let me get this straight. Under your logic, It's completely fine to give people you know are going to evil free will simply because your lonely?

"It doesn't disprove a thing but the ubiquity of seamless logic in philophical discourse."

Your responses were laughable...Evil is the absence of something? A perfect being would have petty ape like feelings of loneliness? Loneliness is a good reason to give evil people free will to kill and rape?

Wow...
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 7:52:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Wow. People's responses are just fucking hilARious tonight.

I compared it to darkness. You know. "Darkness" is not directly provable, because it's actually the absence of something: light.

"Evil" is the absence of "good" -- it is deviant of objective truth, fact, correctness, and righteousness.

You silly logical thinker.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 8:22:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?:

Shhhh, stop asking sensible questions you pagan f*cking heretic!!!
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 8:37:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 7:52:12 PM, Ren wrote:
Wow. People's responses are just fucking hilARious tonight.

I compared it to darkness. You know. "Darkness" is not directly provable, because it's actually the absence of something: light.

"Evil" is the absence of "good" -- it is deviant of objective truth, fact, correctness, and righteousness.

You silly logical thinker.

I thought God was everywhere :/ Anyhow, "the absence of good" doesn't explain natural disasters and nonhuman suffering.

Additionally, the earth turns away from the sun not by any of our free will, kind of like God's "plan"...
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 8:40:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 7:52:12 PM, Ren wrote:
Wow. People's responses are just fucking hilARious tonight.

I compared it to darkness. You know. "Darkness" is not directly provable, because it's actually the absence of something: light.

"Evil" is the absence of "good" -- it is deviant of objective truth, fact, correctness, and righteousness.

Evil is not the absence of good. If you don't do any good deeds to anybody your whole life that doesn't make you evil.

You once again, make no sense.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 8:44:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 7:52:12 PM, Ren wrote:
Wow. People's responses are just fucking hilARious tonight.

I compared it to darkness. You know. "Darkness" is not directly provable, because it's actually the absence of something: light.

"Evil" is the absence of "good" -- it is deviant of objective truth, fact, correctness, and righteousness.

You silly logical thinker.

If you stood in front of somebody and didn't do anything, would that be evil because I wasn't doing anything good under your logic?

The only way evil could be the absence of good, is if you witness evil and don't stop it (like you believe your imaginary God friend does). However, most evil involves not the absence of an action, but the implementation of an action which is considered evil.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 9:21:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 8:40:03 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 3/19/2012 7:52:12 PM, Ren wrote:
Wow. People's responses are just fucking hilARious tonight.

I compared it to darkness. You know. "Darkness" is not directly provable, because it's actually the absence of something: light.

"Evil" is the absence of "good" -- it is deviant of objective truth, fact, correctness, and righteousness.


Evil is not the absence of good. If you don't do any good deeds to anybody your whole life that doesn't make you evil.

You once again, make no sense.

The Fool: A Ren, you are speaking of the law of the divided line. But the problem is that it still mean that Gods power get weaker the farther away he is. This would limit his power.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 9:24:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 9:21:18 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 3/19/2012 8:40:03 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 3/19/2012 7:52:12 PM, Ren wrote:
Wow. People's responses are just fucking hilARious tonight.

I compared it to darkness. You know. "Darkness" is not directly provable, because it's actually the absence of something: light.

"Evil" is the absence of "good" -- it is deviant of objective truth, fact, correctness, and righteousness.


Evil is not the absence of good. If you don't do any good deeds to anybody your whole life that doesn't make you evil.

You once again, make no sense.


The Fool: A Ren, you are speaking of the law of the divided line. But the problem is that it still mean that Gods power get weaker the farther away he is. This would limit his power.

That's based on the assumption that God's "power" is to somehow "apply or incite" good. He is good in and of Himself; he does not, however, necessarily cause it.

God is neutral.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 9:25:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 8:40:03 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:

Evil is not the absence of good. If you don't do any good deeds to anybody your whole life that doesn't make you evil.

Lol? Yes, it does.

Not sure what "evil" means? Might explain your confusion.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 9:26:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Can someone explain how, simply because evil exists, this disproves God?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 9:31:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 9:26:41 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Can someone explain how, simply because evil exists, this disproves God?

It disproves the existence of an all loving, or an all evil God.

If I say there evil in the world, the theist can claim "maybe God has a plan that involves some greater good". I could just easily say that the good in the world is planned by God for some greater evil.

Basically there is no reason to assume God is good or evil.

I mean this planet isn't going to last forever, this solar system isn't going to last forever, stars explode every second. Did God create us just to watch us all die inevitably? It seems like there is a non-sentient force at work here...Besides a sentient evil/ good being.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2012 9:32:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/19/2012 8:44:10 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 3/19/2012 7:52:12 PM, Ren wrote:
Wow. People's responses are just fucking hilARious tonight.

I compared it to darkness. You know. "Darkness" is not directly provable, because it's actually the absence of something: light.

"Evil" is the absence of "good" -- it is deviant of objective truth, fact, correctness, and righteousness.

You silly logical thinker.

If you stood in front of somebody and didn't do anything, would that be evil because I wasn't doing anything good under your logic?

The only way evil could be the absence of good, is if you witness evil and don't stop it (like you believe your imaginary God friend does). However, most evil involves not the absence of an action, but the implementation of an action which is considered evil.

Define darkness.

Once you appear to understand the concept of darkness, we will compare it to evil, and can thus continue the conversation.