Total Posts:174|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Ask Mr. Atheist.

OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 5:54:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Where do babies come from?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

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

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 6:14:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Why do so many atheists consider 'atheism' as part of their identity in the same way I consider Catholicism part of mine?

My point is, let's grant that it's a "lack of belief in God." Why is there a need for atheists to consider this a part of their identity?

It's a genuine question, and I'm not trying to be antagonistic.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 6:19:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The problem of evil allegedly (probably) shows that a God that is all-good, all-powerful, and all wise doesn't exist. But, if such a God did exist, what exactly would our existence look like WRT to suffering? John Hick's point about how such a God would not put us in a hedonistic paradise* is an excellent one.

*http://mind.ucsd.edu...

The relevant part is [7]:

"If, then, God"s aim in making the world is "the bringing of many sons to glory," that aim will naturally determine the kind of world that He has created. Antitheistic writers almost invariably assume a conception of the divine purpose which is contrary to the Christian conception. They assume that the purpose of a loving God must be to create a hedonistic paradise; and therefor to the extent that the world is other than this, it proves to them that God is either not loving enough or not powerful enough to create such a world. They think of God"s relation to the earth on the model of a human being building a cage for a pet animal to dwell in. If he is humane enough he will naturally make his pet"s quarters as pleasant and healthful as he can. Any respect in which the cage falls short of the veterinarian"s ideal, and contains possibilities of accident or disease, is evidence of either limited benevolence or limited means, or both. Those who use the problem of evil as an argument against belief in God almost invariably think of the world in this kind of way. David Hume, for example, speaks of an architect who is trying to plan a house that is to be as comfortable and convenient as possible. If we find that "the windows, doors, fires, passages, stairs, and the whole economy of the building were the source of noise, confusion, fatigue, darkness, and the extremes of heat and cold" we should have no hesitation in blaming the architect. It would be in vain for him to prove that if this or that defect were corrected greater ills would result: still you would assert in general, that, if the architect had skill and good intentions, he might have formed such a plan of the whole, and might have adjusted the parts in such a manner, as would have remedied all or most of these inconveniences."
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 6:30:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:19:46 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
The problem of evil allegedly (probably) shows that a God that is all-good, all-powerful, and all wise doesn't exist. But, if such a God did exist, what exactly would our existence look like WRT to suffering? John Hick's point about how such a God would not put us in a hedonistic paradise* is an excellent one.

*http://mind.ucsd.edu...

The relevant part is [7]:

"If, then, God"s aim in making the world is "the bringing of many sons to glory," that aim will naturally determine the kind of world that He has created. Antitheistic writers almost invariably assume a conception of the divine purpose which is contrary to the Christian conception. They assume that the purpose of a loving God must be to create a hedonistic paradise; and therefor to the extent that the world is other than this, it proves to them that God is either not loving enough or not powerful enough to create such a world. They think of God"s relation to the earth on the model of a human being building a cage for a pet animal to dwell in. If he is humane enough he will naturally make his pet"s quarters as pleasant and healthful as he can. Any respect in which the cage falls short of the veterinarian"s ideal, and contains possibilities of accident or disease, is evidence of either limited benevolence or limited means, or both. Those who use the problem of evil as an argument against belief in God almost invariably think of the world in this kind of way. David Hume, for example, speaks of an architect who is trying to plan a house that is to be as comfortable and convenient as possible. If we find that "the windows, doors, fires, passages, stairs, and the whole economy of the building were the source of noise, confusion, fatigue, darkness, and the extremes of heat and cold" we should have no hesitation in blaming the architect. It would be in vain for him to prove that if this or that defect were corrected greater ills would result: still you would assert in general, that, if the architect had skill and good intentions, he might have formed such a plan of the whole, and might have adjusted the parts in such a manner, as would have remedied all or most of these inconveniences."

Since when was freedom from pain a hedonic paradise?

Why does everyone strawman the Epicurean position in this manner? Even Cicero did this . . .
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 8:00:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?

Oh man, you beat me to it.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 8:01:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 5:53:39 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Do atheists think that they are their own gods?

No, atheists don't believe in gods.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 8:03:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 8:00:47 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?

Oh man, you beat me to it.

This is heading down a very long and boring semantic road.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 8:11:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:14:21 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
Why do so many atheists consider 'atheism' as part of their identity in the same way I consider Catholicism part of mine?

My point is, let's grant that it's a "lack of belief in God." Why is there a need for atheists to consider this a part of their identity?

I was surrounded by Christians who expected me to be a Christian too. My lack of belief was my big devastating secret. Everyone I knew might disdain me, if I slipped up and let my secret out. The only other atheist I knew of, in this country, was Madalyn Murray. When I did come out, my headlights were slashed, and my tires were slashed. I lost thirteen tires to Christian love.

So, yeah, my identity as a freethinker is more important to me than the fact that I like sixties and seventies music, if that's what you're asking.

It's a genuine question, and I'm not trying to be antagonistic.

I believe you. Thank you for the question. I hope my answer satisfies. I have several times been accused of like amorality and Satan worship and communism, just because I don't do religion. A lot of people have a reflexive hostility towards atheists.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 8:15:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 8:11:28 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/14/2012 6:14:21 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
Why do so many atheists consider 'atheism' as part of their identity in the same way I consider Catholicism part of mine?

My point is, let's grant that it's a "lack of belief in God." Why is there a need for atheists to consider this a part of their identity?

I was surrounded by Christians who expected me to be a Christian too. My lack of belief was my big devastating secret. Everyone I knew might disdain me, if I slipped up and let my secret out. The only other atheist I knew of, in this country, was Madalyn Murray. When I did come out, my headlights were slashed, and my tires were slashed. I lost thirteen tires to Christian love.

So, yeah, my identity as a freethinker is more important to me than the fact that I like sixties and seventies music, if that's what you're asking.

It's a genuine question, and I'm not trying to be antagonistic.

I believe you. Thank you for the question. I hope my answer satisfies. I have several times been accused of like amorality and Satan worship and communism, just because I don't do religion. A lot of people have a reflexive hostility towards atheists.

I think he was speaking to the specific notion of "I lack the belief" as in a state of being uncertain about it. Rather than saying "I don't believe" which is a state of certainty. But other than that... touching story.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 8:28:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:30:44 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 10/14/2012 6:19:46 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
The problem of evil allegedly (probably) shows that a God that is all-good, all-powerful, and all wise doesn't exist. But, if such a God did exist, what exactly would our existence look like WRT to suffering? John Hick's point about how such a God would not put us in a hedonistic paradise* is an excellent one.

*http://mind.ucsd.edu...

The relevant part is [7]:

"If, then, God"s aim in making the world is "the bringing of many sons to glory," that aim will naturally determine the kind of world that He has created. Antitheistic writers almost invariably assume a conception of the divine purpose which is contrary to the Christian conception. They assume that the purpose of a loving God must be to create a hedonistic paradise; and therefor to the extent that the world is other than this, it proves to them that God is either not loving enough or not powerful enough to create such a world. They think of God"s relation to the earth on the model of a human being building a cage for a pet animal to dwell in. If he is humane enough he will naturally make his pet"s quarters as pleasant and healthful as he can. Any respect in which the cage falls short of the veterinarian"s ideal, and contains possibilities of accident or disease, is evidence of either limited benevolence or limited means, or both. Those who use the problem of evil as an argument against belief in God almost invariably think of the world in this kind of way. David Hume, for example, speaks of an architect who is trying to plan a house that is to be as comfortable and convenient as possible. If we find that "the windows, doors, fires, passages, stairs, and the whole economy of the building were the source of noise, confusion, fatigue, darkness, and the extremes of heat and cold" we should have no hesitation in blaming the architect. It would be in vain for him to prove that if this or that defect were corrected greater ills would result: still you would assert in general, that, if the architect had skill and good intentions, he might have formed such a plan of the whole, and might have adjusted the parts in such a manner, as would have remedied all or most of these inconveniences."

Since when was freedom from pain a hedonic paradise?

Why does everyone strawman the Epicurean position in this manner? Even Cicero did this . . .

*sigh*
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 8:31:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 8:11:28 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/14/2012 6:14:21 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
Why do so many atheists consider 'atheism' as part of their identity in the same way I consider Catholicism part of mine?

My point is, let's grant that it's a "lack of belief in God." Why is there a need for atheists to consider this a part of their identity?

I was surrounded by Christians who expected me to be a Christian too. My lack of belief was my big devastating secret. Everyone I knew might disdain me, if I slipped up and let my secret out. The only other atheist I knew of, in this country, was Madalyn Murray. When I did come out, my headlights were slashed, and my tires were slashed. I lost thirteen tires to Christian love.

So, yeah, my identity as a freethinker is more important to me than the fact that I like sixties and seventies music, if that's what you're asking.

It's a genuine question, and I'm not trying to be antagonistic.

I believe you. Thank you for the question. I hope my answer satisfies. I have several times been accused of like amorality and Satan worship and communism, just because I don't do religion. A lot of people have a reflexive hostility towards atheists.

Though to be fair, it goes both ways.

Either way its stupid, and doesn't help anyone. :(
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

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

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 8:48:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:19:46 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
The problem of evil allegedly (probably) shows that a God that is all-good, all-powerful, and all wise doesn't exist. But, if such a God did exist, what exactly would our existence look like WRT to suffering? John Hick's point about how such a God would not put us in a hedonistic paradise* is an excellent one.

*http://mind.ucsd.edu...

The relevant part is [7]:

"If, then, God"s aim in making the world is "the bringing of many sons to glory," that aim will naturally determine the kind of world that He has created. Antitheistic writers almost invariably assume a conception of the divine purpose which is contrary to the Christian conception. They assume that the purpose of a loving God must be to create a hedonistic paradise; and therefor to the extent that the world is other than this, it proves to them that God is either not loving enough or not powerful enough to create such a world. They think of God"s relation to the earth on the model of a human being building a cage for a pet animal to dwell in. If he is humane enough he will naturally make his pet"s quarters as pleasant and healthful as he can. Any respect in which the cage falls short of the veterinarian"s ideal, and contains possibilities of accident or disease, is evidence of either limited benevolence or limited means, or both. Those who use the problem of evil as an argument against belief in God almost invariably think of the world in this kind of way. David Hume, for example, speaks of an architect who is trying to plan a house that is to be as comfortable and convenient as possible. If we find that "the windows, doors, fires, passages, stairs, and the whole economy of the building were the source of noise, confusion, fatigue, darkness, and the extremes of heat and cold" we should have no hesitation in blaming the architect. It would be in vain for him to prove that if this or that defect were corrected greater ills would result: still you would assert in general, that, if the architect had skill and good intentions, he might have formed such a plan of the whole, and might have adjusted the parts in such a manner, as would have remedied all or most of these inconveniences."

Damn it pooka. What this quote suggests (to me) is that the world we currently live in has the least amount of suffering possible. Furthermore, architects are not supposedly infallible beings as God is oft painted as. I recognise the fact that the human free will elements prevents a perfect, hedonistic society, but lets be realistic. There are parasites and diseases that need not exist, given a God. There are natural disasters that need not exist, given a God. There are people who need not starve to death, given a God.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 9:06:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Why do atheists hate puppies?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 9:30:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 8:15:03 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 10/14/2012 8:11:28 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/14/2012 6:14:21 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
Why do so many atheists consider 'atheism' as part of their identity in the same way I consider Catholicism part of mine?

I think he was speaking to the specific notion of "I lack the belief" as in a state of being uncertain about it. Rather than saying "I don't believe" which is a state of certainty. But other than that... touching story.

Atheists aren't theists. That doesn't imply uncertainty. Some atheists, like me, are strong atheists; we believe that gods do not exist. Some atheists are strong agnostics; they believe that they have the right answer, and that everyone else is demonstrably wrong. Some atheists are Jewish. Some are all three. The fact that we are atheists doesn't mean we go around thinking "Woe is me, I don't believe anything."

If you were from the USA, and lived in, say, France, and people sometimes treated you badly because of your country of origin, that would be part of your identity. Nur-Ab-Sal asked why some atheists identify as atheists, and I gave him some of my reasons.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 9:52:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:19:46 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
The problem of evil allegedly (probably) shows that a God that is all-good, all-powerful, and all wise doesn't exist.

Proof absolute.

But, if such a God did exist, what exactly would our existence look like WRT to suffering?

There would be none.

John Hick's point about how such a God would not put us in a hedonistic paradise* is an excellent one.

*http://mind.ucsd.edu...

The relevant part is [7]:

"If, then, God"s aim in making the world is "the bringing of many sons to glory," that aim will naturally determine the kind of world that He has created. Antitheistic writers almost invariably assume a conception of the divine purpose which is contrary to the Christian conception.

"The Christian conception"? I like that. For typical Christians, "the Christian conception" is really a tangle of unrecognized contradictions. The PoE focuses on one contradiction, helping Christians untangle their minds.

I don't have to invent a fantasy world to know that the real world doesn't have a tri-omni god.

They assume that the purpose of a loving God must be to create a hedonistic paradise; and therefor to the extent that the world is other than this, it proves to them that God is either not loving enough or not powerful enough to create such a world.

I think this is a straw man. I don't know any atheists who talk this way.

They think of God"s relation to the earth on the model of a human being building a cage for a pet animal to dwell in.

It's simple: If god had the power to prevent evil, and if he also wanted to prevent evil, then there would be no evil. If this world has evil, then there is no god who both has the power and the will to prevent evil.

John Hick can invent justifications for gods who aren't smart or strong enough to prevent evil, or who don't want to, but those don't begin to disprove the obvious point that a god who was smart and strong enough to prevent evil, and who did want to prevent evil, would do so.

If Hick wants to believe in a god who isn't that strong, or isn't that smart, or isn't that nice, he is free to do so, and he won't be contradicting himself. But if he argues for such an inferior god, and then turns around and worships a perfect one, then he has contradicted himself.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 9:53:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?

An obvious lie.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 9:54:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 9:53:18 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?

An obvious lie.

He's being sarcastic. Trying to imply that because some idiotic Christians did stupid and horrible things, it applies to all Christianity.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

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

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 9:56:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 8:00:47 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?

Oh man, you beat me to it.

You confuse me, medic. Sometimes you strike me a thoughtful and sincere, as worth engaging in discussion. Here, where you endorse an obvious lie, you don't seem interested in truth or decency.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 10:00:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 8:31:32 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/14/2012 8:11:28 PM, wiploc wrote:
A lot of people have a reflexive hostility towards atheists.

Though to be fair, it goes both ways.

Either way its stupid, and doesn't help anyone. :(

Agreed.

I'm reading The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haight. It's fascinating, and I recommend it to you.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 10:11:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 6:19:46 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
The problem of evil allegedly (probably) shows that a God that is all-good, all-powerful, and all wise doesn't exist. But, if such a God did exist, what exactly would our existence look like WRT to suffering? John Hick's point about how such a God would not put us in a hedonistic paradise* is an excellent one.

*http://mind.ucsd.edu...

The relevant part is [7]:

"If, then, God"s aim in making the world is "the bringing of many sons to glory," that aim will naturally determine the kind of world that He has created. Antitheistic writers almost invariably assume a conception of the divine purpose which is contrary to the Christian conception. They assume that the purpose of a loving God must be to create a hedonistic paradise; and therefor to the extent that the world is other than this, it proves to them that God is either not loving enough or not powerful enough to create such a world. They think of God"s relation to the earth on the model of a human being building a cage for a pet animal to dwell in. If he is humane enough he will naturally make his pet"s quarters as pleasant and healthful as he can. Any respect in which the cage falls short of the veterinarian"s ideal, and contains possibilities of accident or disease, is evidence of either limited benevolence or limited means, or both. Those who use the problem of evil as an argument against belief in God almost invariably think of the world in this kind of way. David Hume, for example, speaks of an architect who is trying to plan a house that is to be as comfortable and convenient as possible. If we find that "the windows, doors, fires, passages, stairs, and the whole economy of the building were the source of noise, confusion, fatigue, darkness, and the extremes of heat and cold" we should have no hesitation in blaming the architect. It would be in vain for him to prove that if this or that defect were corrected greater ills would result: still you would assert in general, that, if the architect had skill and good intentions, he might have formed such a plan of the whole, and might have adjusted the parts in such a manner, as would have remedied all or most of these inconveniences."

Horrible point, because it utterly ignores the reality of the world/universe humans find themselves in. I mean, the point is true and a valuable asset to the POE discussion but only unto itself. But then you start to consider everything we know about human survival on earth and it instantly falls apart. A hedonistic paradise? Maybe not. But, let's consider what we know about the world and the universe and see if it could be from an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity. (Note: Most of the following will be taken from the attached video.)

The universe:
- Most places kill life instantly via too much heat, cold, or radiation
- Every few million years, your galaxy is bound to orbit in a way that you are so close to a supernova that it destroys the o-zone layer and kills everything on the planet's surface
- We're on a collision course with the Andromeda galaxy

The earth:
- Earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis which kill millions
- Humans can't sustain life on 2/3 of the earth's surface... On half of what remains, any human would soon freeze or starve.
- Over 99% of all life that has ever lived is now extinct

Human body:
- Vision loss with age
- Teeth fall out and will rot/cause diseases without good and regular dental care (the likes of which has only been semi-recently available)
- We have a ridiculously narrow view of the electro magnetic spectrum
- Lethal diseases spread and kill millions of people
- Since we are warm blooded we need food constantly, unlike crocodiles who can eat a chicken and be good for a month

And so on so forth. So maybe God would not have created a hedonistic paradise for humanity but would he have created a world where most locations are not sustainable for human life, there are often natural disasters that wipe out everything in their path including hundreds of thousands of human lives, diseases that kill millions of people, a body that will soon decay and decline in terms of just about every feature, the need to eat constantly as opposed to other animals who don't have to, the extinction of 99% of all life that has ever lived.... No, there is just no way that such a universe and world are the result of a being that is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. The nature of the world and universe is precisely what we would expect if it was simply all indifferent to our well being.

https://www.youtube.com...
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 10:31:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 9:56:01 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/14/2012 8:00:47 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?

Oh man, you beat me to it.

You confuse me, medic. Sometimes you strike me a thoughtful and sincere, as worth engaging in discussion. Here, where you endorse an obvious lie, you don't seem interested in truth or decency.

My post was sarcasm. Replace "atheism/ atheists" with "religion/religious people."
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 10:32:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 9:54:19 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/14/2012 9:53:18 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?

An obvious lie.

He's being sarcastic. Trying to imply that because some idiotic Christians did stupid and horrible things, it applies to all Christianity.

Not just some idiotic Christians. The whole freakin' European continent in the 12th century.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 10:47:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 10:11:18 PM, jat93 wrote:
At 10/14/2012 6:19:46 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
The problem of evil allegedly (probably) shows that a God that is all-good, all-powerful, and all wise doesn't exist. But, if such a God did exist, what exactly would our existence look like WRT to suffering? John Hick's point about how such a God would not put us in a hedonistic paradise* is an excellent one.

*http://mind.ucsd.edu...

The relevant part is [7]:

"If, then, God"s aim in making the world is "the bringing of many sons to glory," that aim will naturally determine the kind of world that He has created. Antitheistic writers almost invariably assume a conception of the divine purpose which is contrary to the Christian conception. They assume that the purpose of a loving God must be to create a hedonistic paradise; and therefor to the extent that the world is other than this, it proves to them that God is either not loving enough or not powerful enough to create such a world. They think of God"s relation to the earth on the model of a human being building a cage for a pet animal to dwell in. If he is humane enough he will naturally make his pet"s quarters as pleasant and healthful as he can. Any respect in which the cage falls short of the veterinarian"s ideal, and contains possibilities of accident or disease, is evidence of either limited benevolence or limited means, or both. Those who use the problem of evil as an argument against belief in God almost invariably think of the world in this kind of way. David Hume, for example, speaks of an architect who is trying to plan a house that is to be as comfortable and convenient as possible. If we find that "the windows, doors, fires, passages, stairs, and the whole economy of the building were the source of noise, confusion, fatigue, darkness, and the extremes of heat and cold" we should have no hesitation in blaming the architect. It would be in vain for him to prove that if this or that defect were corrected greater ills would result: still you would assert in general, that, if the architect had skill and good intentions, he might have formed such a plan of the whole, and might have adjusted the parts in such a manner, as would have remedied all or most of these inconveniences."

Horrible point, because it utterly ignores the reality of the world/universe humans find themselves in.

No, you just utterly misunderstand the point.

I mean, the point is true and a valuable asset to the POE discussion but only unto itself. But then you start to consider everything we know about human survival on earth and it instantly falls apart. A hedonistic paradise? Maybe not. But, let's consider what we know about the world and the universe and see if it could be from an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity. (Note: Most of the following will be taken from the attached video.)

The universe:
- Most places kill life instantly via too much heat, cold, or radiation
- Every few million years, your galaxy is bound to orbit in a way that you are so close to a supernova that it destroys the o-zone layer and kills everything on the planet's surface
- We're on a collision course with the Andromeda galaxy

The earth:
- Earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis which kill millions
- Humans can't sustain life on 2/3 of the earth's surface... On half of what remains, any human would soon freeze or starve.
- Over 99% of all life that has ever lived is now extinct

Human body:
- Vision loss with age
- Teeth fall out and will rot/cause diseases without good and regular dental care (the likes of which has only been semi-recently available)
- We have a ridiculously narrow view of the electro magnetic spectrum
- Lethal diseases spread and kill millions of people
- Since we are warm blooded we need food constantly, unlike crocodiles who can eat a chicken and be good for a month

And so on so forth. So maybe God would not have created a hedonistic paradise for humanity but would he have created a world where most locations are not sustainable for human life, there are often natural disasters that wipe out everything in their path including hundreds of thousands of human lives, diseases that kill millions of people, a body that will soon decay and decline in terms of just about every feature, the need to eat constantly as opposed to other animals who don't have to, the extinction of 99% of all life that has ever lived.... No, there is just no way that such a universe and world are the result of a being that is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. The nature of the world and universe is precisely what we would expect if it was simply all indifferent to our well being.

https://www.youtube.com...

So, what would the world look like wrt to suffering/evil if such a God did exist? You didn't answer my question.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 11:06:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 9:52:18 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/14/2012 6:19:46 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
The problem of evil allegedly (probably) shows that a God that is all-good, all-powerful, and all wise doesn't exist.

Proof absolute.


But, if such a God did exist, what exactly would our existence look like WRT to suffering?

There would be none.


That's absurd. There certainly seem to be goods that require evils in order to be actualized - for instance repentance. Roderick Chisholm talks about it as such: it is the state of affairs consisting of "the remorse and displeasure I experience when contemplating my wrongful act". The contemplation itself is ethically neutral but the displeasure I experience is an evil. But when you put the two twogether one gets the "good" act of repentance. The evil and the neutral act combine to form a good that could not have been realized otherwise (and it's good precisely because a part of it is bad or evil) and that is crucial to forming a virtuous moral character.

John Hick's point about how such a God would not put us in a hedonistic paradise* is an excellent one.

*http://mind.ucsd.edu...

The relevant part is [7]:

"If, then, God"s aim in making the world is "the bringing of many sons to glory," that aim will naturally determine the kind of world that He has created. Antitheistic writers almost invariably assume a conception of the divine purpose which is contrary to the Christian conception.

"The Christian conception"? I like that. For typical Christians, "the Christian conception" is really a tangle of unrecognized contradictions. The PoE focuses on one contradiction, helping Christians untangle their minds.

I don't have to invent a fantasy world to know that the real world doesn't have a tri-omni god.


*sigh* You're missing the point of the question.



They assume that the purpose of a loving God must be to create a hedonistic paradise; and therefor to the extent that the world is other than this, it proves to them that God is either not loving enough or not powerful enough to create such a world.

I think this is a straw man. I don't know any atheists who talk this way.


They think of God"s relation to the earth on the model of a human being building a cage for a pet animal to dwell in.

It's simple: If god had the power to prevent evil, and if he also wanted to prevent evil, then there would be no evil. If this world has evil, then there is no god who both has the power and the will to prevent evil.

John Hick can invent justifications for gods who aren't smart or strong enough to prevent evil, or who don't want to, but those don't begin to disprove the obvious point that a god who was smart and strong enough to prevent evil, and who did want to prevent evil, would do so.


Unless if some evils are necessary to realize some goods, correct?

If Hick wants to believe in a god who isn't that strong, or isn't that smart, or isn't that nice, he is free to do so, and he won't be contradicting himself. But if he argues for such an inferior god, and then turns around and worships a perfect one, then he has contradicted himself.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 11:09:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/14/2012 9:56:01 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/14/2012 8:00:47 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/14/2012 7:25:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why have all the atheists throughout history propagated their religion through violent means under direct command of the Atheist doctrine?

Oh man, you beat me to it.

You confuse me, medic. Sometimes you strike me a thoughtful and sincere, as worth engaging in discussion. Here, where you endorse an obvious lie, you don't seem interested in truth or decency.

Lighten up, I'm just playing off his obvious sarcasm.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2012 11:10:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
How can the problem of evil absolutely disprove God if it's a claim to logical inconsistency and logic does not necessarily bind God? (If he existed)
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)