|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Jan 2, 2020 12:36:02 GMT
Atheists have a problem with the term God and spirtuality. Theists see this as separate and away from them. Religion has done much to malign the authentic notion of God and spirituality, that it has now become its own worst enemy. Not that it ever wasn't. Not sure. Maybe it depends on the church and the priest? Some priests make religion boring and predictable, others can use their position to foster strength in the Community. Actually, what I like most about the priest at the church I go to is he has a sense of humor. Sense of humor can help with the sermon being preached, but that doesn't change the distortion of whatever message is being preached about and what God represents. It is not fostering genuine strength to rely on some entity\being to offer salvation for some form of afterlife that is bogus.
I myself am not religious and see it as a scourge for the most part on humanity. There is much culture worth preserving in religion, but as for the delusion of belief, that is best left behind so one can move on with their own power of personal growth and transformation.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jan 2, 2020 19:19:39 GMT
I did. He told me that the reason you gave for why he allows suffering is wrong. You said, "God allows suffering for the same reason you do. If there were no suffering or pain we wouldn't be alive. It's part of a package deal." God said that's not why he allows suffering. Sounds very thoughtful on his part. I have had enough pain and suffering in my life. I wish it were not the case. Is there a particular reason why you're so interested in suffering? I've given you my best answer, and you didn't like it, yet you persist in asking the same question. What question do you think I'm asking? I mean besides the ones I posed as part of my original response to your explanation of suffering. I wasn't posing the question "Why does God allow suffering?" The OP did that. I don't wonder about that because a) I don't think there is a god and b) I am convinced there isn't any god who cares about whether humans suffer or not. I responded to your original rsp as a hypothetical situation...IF there is a god who is omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent, I don't think HIS reasons for permitting suffering are the same as why humans "permit" suffering. I don't think a god who is omnipotent would have to "deal" with the real world like humans do. A god ostensibly could make things happen with his omnipotent powers, and what he makes happen would be the best, least offensive to humans, IF that is, he cared about humans.
I AM concerned about suffering, NOT because I, personally suffer. I hardly have experienced any suffering. My life has been almost idyllic. I'm 70 and have experienced very very limited suffering. I guess, I'm odd in that I worry about suffering because I'm aware others suffer. But lately, I've been less concerned because pretty much everyone believes in a god who has super powers and could do something about suffering, therefore the chances are excellent that anyone who is suffering is doing so with that basic belief. So...if they aren't concerned whether their suffering calls into question their theistic beliefs, why should I...who hardly ever suffers...be so concerned?
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 2, 2020 22:16:33 GMT
I agree that scenarios where there is an afterlife but no God(s) ruling over it are not uncommon. Members of some generally non-theistic religions tend to believe in an afterlife but without reference to a deity. However, my point is that the opposite is not very common at all. Generally speaking where there is a God or Gods, there is some form of afterlife. I haven't seen any exceptions offered up that hold up under scrutiny. And my point remains: that your argument is one based on popularity, and that there is no logical necessity for a Cause of everything to have created an afterlife. Since we both agree that there are groups which separate out the claims for a god from those for reincarnation it is evident they don't see any necessity either. Incidentally when you say "where there is a God or Gods, there is some form of afterlife" I assume you don't assert anything more than the idea of a heaven, not its certainty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Jan 2, 2020 22:30:43 GMT
I agree that scenarios where there is an afterlife but no God(s) ruling over it are not uncommon. Members of some generally non-theistic religions tend to believe in an afterlife but without reference to a deity. However, my point is that the opposite is not very common at all. Generally speaking where there is a God or Gods, there is some form of afterlife. I haven't seen any exceptions offered up that hold up under scrutiny. And my point remains: that your argument is one based on popularity, and that there is no logical necessity for a Cause of everything to have created an afterlife. Since we both agree that there are groups which separate out the claims for a god from those for reincarnation it is evident they don't see any necessity either. Incidentally when you say "where there is a God or Gods, there is some form of afterlife" I assume you don't assert anything more than the idea of a heaven, not its certainty. Actually, Judaism as whole does not preach there is an afterlife. But if Jews want to believe in it, the rabbis don't interfere.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Jan 2, 2020 22:39:03 GMT
I agree that scenarios where there is an afterlife but no God(s) ruling over it are not uncommon. Members of some generally non-theistic religions tend to believe in an afterlife but without reference to a deity. However, my point is that the opposite is not very common at all. Generally speaking where there is a God or Gods, there is some form of afterlife. I haven't seen any exceptions offered up that hold up under scrutiny. And my point remains: that your argument is one based on popularity, and that there is no logical necessity for a Cause of everything to have created an afterlife. Since we both agree that there are groups which separate out the claims for a god from those for reincarnation it is evident they don't see any necessity either. Incidentally when you say "where there is a God or Gods, there is some form of afterlife" I assume you don't assert anything more than the idea of a heaven, not its certainty. It would be foolish of the op to assert or entertain any certainty of a heaven or superior God being based on religious doctrine. He has often appeared much smarter than that and I really don't believe that is his stance or point. However, he did claim he attends a church, but that may be out of community spirit only and obliging others and not taking on board the truth of the gospel, only by discerning what is being said.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jan 3, 2020 0:56:33 GMT
I do find it interesting that the people who raise the problem of suffering as an actual and significant problem are generally those who've either left theism behind or are on their way out the door, so to speak. Unless a solid theist, is refuting the problem of evil, I'm not sure they even think about it.
The other thing I find interesting is that almost always, when someone like me raises the problem of suffering the theists I'm discussing with seems to always assume it's some personal suffering I've experienced that leads or has lead me down that path. I don't know about any other skeptics (of theism), but when I think of the problem of suffering, it's not about me....IT'S NOT ABOUT ME. I am not the one whose suffering I'm thinking about. If my observations were limited to those whose suffering is as insignificant as mine has been, I wouldn't call it a problem at all. O am thinking of the broader picture...the suffering of countless millions or hundreds of millions due to any number of natural disasters, diseases, famines, and deformity. But that response from the theist tells me a little about them, I think. Whereas I am not thinking of my own suffering when I think of how much suffering there is/has been in the world, their response might indicate that the suffering THEY are thinking of is what's happened to them, personally. Their..."oh dear, I woke up late for work and stubbed my toe" or "I had a headache last week for nearly an hour" to them is perfectly understandable and quite within the realm of what a good God might allow to happen. Maybe that is why people become atheists...they just know more about how much suffering there is in the world and it doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jan 3, 2020 2:09:57 GMT
I do find it interesting that the people who raise the problem of suffering as an actual and significant problem are generally those who've either left theism behind or are on their way out the door, so to speak. Unless a solid theist, is refuting the problem of evil, I'm not sure they even think about it. The other thing I find interesting is that almost always, when someone like me raises the problem of suffering the theists I'm discussing with seems to always assume it's some personal suffering I've experienced that leads or has lead me down that path. I don't know about any other skeptics (of theism), but when I think of the problem of suffering, it's not about me....IT'S NOT ABOUT ME. I am not the one whose suffering I'm thinking about. If my observations were limited to those whose suffering is as insignificant as mine has been, I wouldn't call it a problem at all. O am thinking of the broader picture...the suffering of countless millions or hundreds of millions due to any number of natural disasters, diseases, famines, and deformity. But that response from the theist tells me a little about them, I think. Whereas I am not thinking of my own suffering when I think of how much suffering there is/has been in the world, their response might indicate that the suffering THEY are thinking of is what's happened to them, personally. Their..."oh dear, I woke up late for work and stubbed my toe" or "I had a headache last week for nearly an hour" to them is perfectly understandable and quite within the realm of what a good God might allow to happen. Maybe that is why people become atheists...they just know more about how much suffering there is in the world and it doesn't make sense.^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^ It was certainly part of my process.
|
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Jan 3, 2020 6:45:15 GMT
I agree that scenarios where there is an afterlife but no God(s) ruling over it are not uncommon. Members of some generally non-theistic religions tend to believe in an afterlife but without reference to a deity. However, my point is that the opposite is not very common at all. Generally speaking where there is a God or Gods, there is some form of afterlife. I haven't seen any exceptions offered up that hold up under scrutiny. And my point remains: that your argument is one based on popularity, and that there is no logical necessity for a Cause of everything to have created an afterlife. Since we both agree that there are groups which separate out the claims for a god from those for reincarnation it is evident they don't see any necessity either. Incidentally when you say "where there is a God or Gods, there is some form of afterlife" I assume you don't assert anything more than the idea of a heaven, not its certainty. Of course I'm not certain of anything. However, historically, any belief in God or Gods has with it some form of spirit world or afterlife. This isn't my opinion. Until I get actual examples that contradict it, it's a fact. The fact you can have afterlife with no Gods doesn't mean it works both ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Jan 3, 2020 9:47:06 GMT
This Rev. is so snoggable...  |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jan 3, 2020 15:04:24 GMT
It's a perfectly reasonable question, one that isn't negated by appeal to comparing a purported eternity of bliss to a temporary existence with suffering.
If I booked a cruise, at the beginning waited in a smelly departure lounge, complained to the staff about the odors, with them then explaining to me "don't worry, the departure lounge smells bad but the cruise ship itself is perfect!", it'd be perfectly reasonable for me to be highly suspicious of their claim.
|
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 3, 2020 15:31:36 GMT
It's a perfectly reasonable question, one that isn't negated by appeal to comparing a purported eternity of bliss to a temporary existence with suffering. If I booked a cruise, at the beginning waited in a smelly departure lounge, complained to the staff about the odors, with them then explaining to me "don't worry, the departure lounge smells bad but the cruise ship itself is perfect!", it'd be perfectly reasonable for me to be highly suspicious of their claim. And even if you weren't suspicious of their claim, it's still valid to ask why, if it is well within their means to solve, do they allow the departure lounge to stink.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 3, 2020 19:07:33 GMT
Of course I'm not certain of anything. ... it's a fact. Er -I am not sure if these two statements are compatible lol And again. But even so: You apparently consider afterlife and god like a metaphysical shoe and sock, always together because most people wear them like that. But if you admit that one can claim an shoe worn without sock, afterlife without god, then the necessary link is broken, either way. And you still haven't explained why, logically, a Cause would have to create an afterlife which remains my point. I agree such a connection is popular - just not logically necessary. The Argument from Popularity is a fallacy. Even if all those who believe in a deity believe in an afterlife it doesn't make them necessarily right to associate the two, or to think that one is responsible for the other. Since I don't want to keep repeating myself I will leave it at that.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 4, 2020 0:08:24 GMT
God allows suffering for the same reason you do. If there were no suffering or pain we wouldn't be alive. It's part of a package deal. We are alive. What does that have to do with God? We are either alive and living the life we are or we are dead. I fail to see a link with any other purpose.
|
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Jan 4, 2020 0:27:17 GMT
Of course I'm not certain of anything. ... it's a fact. Er -I am not sure if these two statements are compatible lol And again. But even so: You apparently consider afterlife and god like a metaphysical shoe and sock, always together because most people wear them like that. But if you admit that one can claim an shoe worn without sock, afterlife without god, then the necessary link is broken, either way. And you still haven't explained why, logically, a Cause would have to create an afterlife which remains my point. I agree such a connection is popular - just not logically necessary. The Argument from Popularity is a fallacy. Even if all those who believe in a deity believe in an afterlife it does make them necessarily right to associate the two, or to think that one is responsible for the other. Since I don't want to keep repeating myself I will leave it at that. I'm not sure what you mean by that. Perhaps an argument from popularity is a fallacy, but in the absence of a single instance, a single example of a belief system that contains God(s) but no spirit-worlds, heavens, reincarnation of other form of afterlife then I can say that, as far as human belief systems go, where there are God(s) there is a belief that 'When you die, that's not it'. I never said anything about one being responsible for the other. Like you said, there can be beliefs in all sorts of afterlife scenarios that contain no 'Gods'. whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Huxley on Jan 4, 2020 9:53:03 GMT
God allows suffering for the same reason you do. If there were no suffering or pain we wouldn't be alive. It's part of a package deal. We are alive. What does that have to do with God? We are either alive and living the life we are or we are dead. I fail to see a link with any other purpose. You are bold but the table can turn on you fast, keep that in mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 5, 2020 0:18:29 GMT
We are alive. What does that have to do with God? We are either alive and living the life we are or we are dead. I fail to see a link with any other purpose. You are bold but the table can turn on you fast, keep that in mind. Agreed, butt again what has that got to do with God?
|
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 5, 2020 0:30:09 GMT
You are bold but the table can turn on you fast, keep that in mind. Agreed, butt again what has that got to do with God? It sounds like her way of saying there are no atheists in foxholes.
|
|
