Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 10:19:49 GMT
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus We all know God doesn't actually exist, but even if he does, then he would just be A). Inept, B). Indifferent, or C). A sadistic bastard who loves watching his creation suffer. In which case, you have absolutely no reason to be getting on your knees and praying to this bastard. He wouldn't deserve your worship. Again, if he actually exists but we know he doesn't. Christians normally play the 'free will' card to overcome this. Meaning God created the world and created us without flaws, but we exercised our own free will to sin. But it would be impossible for free will to exist or be exercised in the way that would be required, because we do not choose our characteristics, our parents, our genes, our biases and proclivities, and we cannot choose which thoughts to think before we think them. This is why I would say that I know for a fact that the Christian conception of God does not exist. You said that well. It reminded me of the psychological theory of "hard determinism." It's been many years since I read about it. I had first heard of it from an electronic band called, "Zia" the singer is into psycology and space. Her parents are mathematicians. I remember a related youtube video maped out a square/box diagram that showed the process of what effects decision making, and the last point being the arrival of an answer as to what path to take.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 12, 2017 12:13:01 GMT
I already have hints any intelligence person could pick up on. It would be interesting to see people explain the soundness of it too but that never happens.😔 Soooooo....really no flawed reasoning then. Got it! No flawed reasoning is ever found by the illiterate
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 12, 2017 12:15:42 GMT
I certainly agree the God of any Abrahamic religion certainly isn't "loving", unless you define "love" in the same way Kim Jong-Un loves the people of North Korea. At most you could make a feasible argument for a rather indifferent non interventional deist God (ie Deadbeat Dad God) He us totally loving . People that don't like him just get bent out of shape about him liking people that like him more than the people who don't like him. I would consider God a weirdo and unloving if he loved his enemies more. That would be Trump level antics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 12:23:39 GMT
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus We all know God doesn't actually exist, but even if he does, then he would just be A). Inept, B). Indifferent, or C). A sadistic bastard who loves watching his creation suffer. In which case, you have absolutely no reason to be getting on your knees and praying to this bastard. He wouldn't deserve your worship. Again, if he actually exists but we know he doesn't. People always say that God created life because he loves us, but when you think about life in general it is brutal and cruel. All life is essentially a contest to see who the strongest is, and the weak will suffer. I'm not just talking about human life, but all creatures. It baffles my mind that a loving being would create such a horrific way of life where there will be guaranteed suffering of many innocent creatures. There's no way around this suffering...it's part of the design.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 12, 2017 12:49:20 GMT
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus We all know God doesn't actually exist, but even if he does, then he would just be A). Inept, B). Indifferent, or C). A sadistic bastard who loves watching his creation suffer. In which case, you have absolutely no reason to be getting on your knees and praying to this bastard. He wouldn't deserve your worship. Again, if he actually exists but we know he doesn't. People always say that God created life because he loves us, but when you think about life in general it is brutal and cruel. All life is essentially a contest to see who the strongest is, and the weak will suffer. I'm not just talking about human life, but all creatures. It baffles my mind that a loving being would create such a horrific way of life where there will be guaranteed suffering of many innocent creatures. There's no way around this suffering...it's part of the design. This isn't true. Civilization verifies that compassion & charity is too prevalent. We don't even let old people and sick kids die. If one's life is brutal and cruel it's probably a sign that their life sucks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 13:30:30 GMT
People always say that God created life because he loves us, but when you think about life in general it is brutal and cruel. All life is essentially a contest to see who the strongest is, and the weak will suffer. I'm not just talking about human life, but all creatures. It baffles my mind that a loving being would create such a horrific way of life where there will be guaranteed suffering of many innocent creatures. There's no way around this suffering...it's part of the design. This isn't true. Civilization verifies that compassion & charity is too prevalent. We don't even let old people and sick kids die. If one's life is brutal and cruel it's probably a sign that their life sucks. I all too often hear people saying we should just let the old, sick, and poor die. Compassion and charity does exist, but not in everyone, and not everyone is going to benefit from it. Many many people are going to suffer horribly everyday. Also, I'm not just talking about people. Awhile back I was really into watching nature videos, and in those videos I saw many animals suffer horrible fates because they were prey destined to get ripped to shreds by a predator. Many of the animals that suffered were just babies, because they are easier targets. I can't imagine that any loving being would willingly create a world so horrible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 15:55:35 GMT
I certainly agree the God of any Abrahamic religion certainly isn't "loving", unless you define "love" in the same way Kim Jong-Un loves the people of North Korea. At most you could make a feasible argument for a rather indifferent non interventional deist God (ie Deadbeat Dad God) He us totally loving . People that don't like him just get bent out of shape about him liking people that like him more than the people who don't like him. I would consider God a weirdo and unloving if he loved his enemies more. That would be Trump level antics. There are many problems with this. Firstly, devoutly religious people suffer very badly in this world as well. Secondly, God has determined from the outset of the universe who is going to believe in him, and who is going to believe which branch of that theology. If he had presented himself to all of us, and created a universe in which none need suffer even so much as a pinprick, then that would be a loving God.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Mar 12, 2017 16:04:02 GMT
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus We all know God doesn't actually exist, but even if he does, then he would just be A). Inept, B). Indifferent, or C). A sadistic bastard who loves watching his creation suffer. In which case, you have absolutely no reason to be getting on your knees and praying to this bastard. He wouldn't deserve your worship. Again, if he actually exists but we know he doesn't. If we all know this, then why do you spend so much time trying to sell this point? You sound more like you are tying to convince yourself than anyone else.
|
|
|
Post by Jillian on Mar 12, 2017 16:05:44 GMT
Well, I disagree, I do think that "he" is loving, but I also think that it is much more complicated and beyond anything what we humans can comprehend.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 13, 2017 1:45:20 GMT
He us totally loving . People that don't like him just get bent out of shape about him liking people that like him more than the people who don't like him. I would consider God a weirdo and unloving if he loved his enemies more. That would be Trump level antics. There are many problems with this. Firstly, devoutly religious people suffer very badly in this world as well. Secondly, God has determined from the outset of the universe who is going to believe in him, and who is going to believe which branch of that theology. If he had presented himself to all of us, and created a universe in which none need suffer even so much as a pinprick, then that would be a loving God. It's true that everything that happens to wicked people could happen to righteous people. However there are two flaws to your premiseThat has nothing to do with love and you are mandating rules that are not in evidence. 1. This has nothing to do with God loving the righteous. 2. It requires mandates that are not in evidence nor should be expected. It's all well and good that ones think thy know what God should do for them, it's an entirely different matter to actually think it's something he should adhere to. It's also annoying that people seem to think that just because there is suffering, that means everyone is suffering and miserable. Most everyone's doing pretty OK
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Mar 13, 2017 1:59:34 GMT
Well, I disagree, I do think that "he" is loving, but I also think that it is much more complicated and beyond anything what we humans can comprehend. Any reason he didn't make us smart enough to comprehend him? Not powerful enough? Just a dick move?
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Mar 13, 2017 2:19:30 GMT
It's true that everything that happens to wicked people could happen to righteous people... It's also annoying that people seem to think that just because there is suffering, that means everyone is suffering and miserable. Most everyone's doing pretty OK. No, they are not. Maybe the ones sitting in relative comfort in suburban brick churches are, but those in third world countries deal with famine, disease and death every day. The Middle East is a powder keg waiting to blow. North Korea is threatening to launch NUCLEAR WEAPONS that would bring about nuclear war and subsequently nuclear winter. How far down in the sand do you have your head stuck?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 13, 2017 2:26:07 GMT
It's true that everything that happens to wicked people could happen to righteous people... It's also annoying that people seem to think that just because there is suffering, that means everyone is suffering and miserable. Most everyone's doing pretty OKI will never understand why people equate happiness with money. People with money encounter death everyday too incidentally. People in 3rd world countries can & do experience happiness while enduring hardships. That is not in question. Your pity of them does not equate to the entirety of their life. For those ones in the throes of death or maybe slavery or various addictions of one kind or another, then I would readily admit to not including them in the "most" category. But clearly most people are finding measures of joy in whatever life they are enduring including yourself. As an aside, are you really in despair just because North Korea has nuclear weapons? I'm more worried about the US & Russia having them. Still happy though!
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Mar 13, 2017 2:39:05 GMT
I will never understand why people equate happiness with money. People with money encounter death everyday too incidentally. People in 3rd world countries can & do experience happiness while enduring hardships. That is not in question. Your pity of them does not equate to the entirety of their life. For those ones in the throes of death or maybe slavery or various addictions of one kind or another, then I would readily admit to not including them in the "most" category. But clearly most people are finding measures of joy in whatever life they are enduring including yourself. As an aside, are you really in despair just because North Korea has nuclear weapons? I'm more worried about the US & Russia having them. Still happy though! Yeah, I'm sure you are, because you firmly believe that there is life after death and that you will go to heaven for eternal bliss.
Some of us live in the real world, and understand that this is the only life we will ever have, there is no paradise on the other side, and we had better make this world as good as we can, for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Mar 13, 2017 2:56:46 GMT
That's certainly a logical approach. There is a problem, however.
First of all, we do know there are supernatural forces at work, meaning forces that are the ones which actually generate Physics. Otherwise, there would be no Newton's first law of motion, second law of motion, etc..
Then we know we are very powerless, teeny entities, among billions of others, and it appears that at least the other mammals are "meter readers" of their organisms, and possibly other animals are as well, it boggles the mind how many "minions" there are to appease some obviously malevolent being.
However, the complete Satanic being, if it is one, would be even worse. Being roasted in constant pain, or an Eternity on a stake would be worse. It would not ever get better as people like to think. The idea that it isn't worse is just wishful thinking, and I confess I would like to think it as well.
Now, we have "omnipotent" as a criteria for a god. To the Gnostic, and I think most Christians lean a bit towards that idea, since the gospels and the entire bible confirm this as a book, to most Gnostics, this Universe is like a little box of which the Satan character got control via the fall. God is still omnipotent in the grand Universe, but this tiny little box in which he somehow fooled us into entering, is under a set of rules by which angels (most of which are really demons) pull the strings.
This is what I've observed as an objective observer. It's the only possible answer to the puzzle we know as Life.
How to get out of this box? Is it Jesus? Jesus actually says it's the Holy Ghost, which is the "truth" of the good God. Using the name of "Jesus" is nothing without the idea that it is the Holy Ghost. It isn't even how his name was pronounced when he was crucified. Not even close.
As a "meter reader" of an organism, it's natural to hope that it all ends with death, but you can't count on that. That would mean that you rely on some supernatural power to end your existence with the meter you read. Don't count on a hateful Satan character to do that.
Sure, he'll threaten the meter reader who only reads the meter of the Holy Ghost, to end his or her existence, but even that would be better than being under the thumb of Satan.
The "angels" in authority are spiritual, and when we read for the Holy Ghost, we can finally testify of them when we die from this "box" of an evil empire. All fallen angels are not yet in Hell in our timeline. We know this by experience. As you point out, it isn't a "good God" who does evil. That's a moron's belief. You obviously are intelligent, and on your way to higher truth, if you haven't already gotten there.
The bad thing about being "Gnostic", if it is the truth, is that it can't be organized in this life as a functioning institution by definition, since it acknowledges that the higher powers are against its truth. And we see this symptom throughout all of History. Hard to ignore.
So the gnostic still serves in a church that functions, but keeps thoughts to self for the most part. Satan and the demon angels use all their devices to divide Gnostics who band together.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 13, 2017 3:13:40 GMT
I will never understand why people equate happiness with money. People with money encounter death everyday too incidentally. People in 3rd world countries can & do experience happiness while enduring hardships. That is not in question. Your pity of them does not equate to the entirety of their life. For those ones in the throes of death or maybe slavery or various addictions of one kind or another, then I would readily admit to not including them in the "most" category. But clearly most people are finding measures of joy in whatever life they are enduring including yourself. As an aside, are you really in despair just because North Korea has nuclear weapons? I'm more worried about the US & Russia having them. Still happy though! Yeah, I'm sure you are, because you firmly believe that there is life after death and that you will go to heaven for eternal bliss.
Some of us live in the real world, and understand that this is the only life we will ever have, there is no paradise on the other side, and we had better make this world as good as we can, for everyone.
Don't presume to tell me what I believe. You don't know me that well. I'm happy because I'm alive. Like most normal people of have no desire to die at all. I think the bigger issue is your admission of not being happy.
|
|
fatpaul
Sophomore
@fatpaul
Posts: 502
Likes: 193
|
Post by fatpaul on Mar 13, 2017 12:04:39 GMT
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus There's nothing like a good logical argument to get the semantic gymnastics going. I think they should include it as discipline in the next Olympic Games because there are some really good semantic gymnasts out there.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 13, 2017 14:07:10 GMT
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus There's nothing like a good logical argument to get the semantic gymnastics going. I think they should include it as discipline in the next Olympic Games because there are some really good semantic gymnasts out there. What's logical about it?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Mar 13, 2017 14:22:10 GMT
|
|
fatpaul
Sophomore
@fatpaul
Posts: 502
Likes: 193
|
Post by fatpaul on Mar 13, 2017 14:39:05 GMT
Of the question of evil: If willing but not able then not omnipotent.. it follows because not being able is sufficient for not being omnipotent and being not able necessitates not being omnipotent. Unless you have some other definitional of omnipotence that doesn't mention ability? If able but not willing then malevolent... it follows because not willing to stop evil but able to so is sufficient for malevolence and not willing but able necessitates malevolence. Well maybe I'll give you this one though and I'd personally say it necessitates indifference more than malevolence which is just as worst considering we're hypothesising a deity. If able and willing then why evil. Don't tell me.. the big chap... he's got them mysterious ways about him. You can talk about free-will and not knowing the mind of God, but the fact of the matter is that evil is on the table and it wasn't us who set the game up. If not able and not willing then why call him God. Why not call him Malcolm, Billy or any ordinary Tom, Dick or Harry? It a logical argument because they are not outlandish ridiculous premises (no one is saying God is made of green cheese for example) and the conclusion follows from the premises, i.e. they are valid. This doesn't mean that the conclusions are true but rather, given it's validity, questions may be asked of the premises as opposed to the logical form of the argument.
|
|