There's so much here
1."we know that good is opposed to evil"- This is an unsubstantiated assertion because I would bet we do not define good and evil in the same way.
2."we say that pain is evil"- No we don't. Pain is a biological response. The actions that cause the pain can be right, wrong or neither.
3.You're argument that you should give your God a pass on allowing evil because you believe you MIGHT have a greater plan is really disturbing. I want for a minute to imagine that you are witnessing but are helpless to rescue a 4 year old from being brutally raped and tortured. You hear their pained screams and their bones cracking and you would have the audacity to tell them that's is all worth it because God loves them and it's all worth it because He has a plan to comfort them? Allowing just one such situation to happen means God if he exists is not worth love let alone worship.
4." To what length do you expect God to go to steal away our humanity and negate science to protect the innocent from abuses"- Um.... humanity is always thrown away by theists when defending God because his stuff is divine and perceived as more important. This is where the saying, "Nobody feeds the homeless faster than an atheist," comes from. Theists always engage this hierarchy of God>humanity. This idea is straight out of the Bible that you are to love God more than you love your fellow man. Humans believe themselves to give control to God, so in a deluded sense "God" drives their actions.
Your whole premise relies on there being a God existing which is faith. You're using your faith to give God the exemption. Because people can have faith and come to different conclusions about the same thing (the nature of God), it is not a reliable path to truth. To get out of a special pleading fallacy you need demonstrable reasoning for the exclusion. This can't be faith. You can't just say God isn't held to the same standard because I define him not to be and expect someone else to give you a pass.
Board index ‹ Assorted Bible Questions
12 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Re: The Choice upon Death question
by jimwalton » Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:36 am
> This is an unsubstantiated assertion because I would bet we do not define good and evil in the same way.
Regardless of how one circumscribes good and evil, they are regarded as antithetical concepts.
> "we say that pain is evil"- No we don't. Pain is a biological response.
And "abuses" is a social perception. Are we going to discuss or give in to absurdity? If you want to go in this direction, please define "innocent" and "abuses" and "intercede" before we proceed.
> You're argument that you should give your God a pass on allowing evil because you believe you MIGHT have a greater plan is really disturbing. I want for a minute to imagine that you are witnessing but are helpless to rescue a 4 year old from being brutally raped and tortured. You hear their pained screams and their bones cracking and you would have the audacity to tell them that's is all worth it because God loves them and it's all worth it because He has a plan to comfort them? Allowing just one such situation to happen means God if he exists is not worth love let alone worship.
Wow. This is quite out of control. Please define "god," "evil," "greater," "disturbing.
> You hear their pained screams and their bones cracking and you would have the audacity to tell them that's is all worth it because God loves them and it's all worth it because He has a plan to comfort them?
This is wholesale and total distortion of everything we're talking about. With this kind of retort ("Good as the opposite of evil is an unsubstantiated assertion"; "this is all worth it because God loves them") I'm not sure we can proceed with this discussion. It's absurd. I didn't say any such thing. I didn't give God a pass. This isn't special pleading. I would never tell someone "it's all worth it because God has a plan to comfort you." You're not even interacting with me, but rather just creating edges and conflict.
> Allowing just one such situation to happen means God if he exists is not worth love let alone worship.
This statement indicates you didn't read what I said. Or you didn't process it at all.
> humanity is always thrown away by theists
?????? We throw away humanity?? I have to admit, I'm very frustrated in this conversation. What in the world are you talking about?
> This is where the saying, "Nobody feeds the homeless faster than an atheist," comes from.
????????
> Your whole premise relies on there being a God existing
Of...course...it...does.
> Your whole premise relies on there being a God existing which is faith.
No, there are many evidences for the existence of God.
> Because people can have faith and come to different conclusions about the same thing (the nature of God)
Scientists come to different conclusions about the nature of things (dark matter, gravity vs. electromagnetic force as the foundational force of the universe, whether humanity is contributing to global warming or whether it is a natural cycle). Are we to conclude that science is then not a reliable path to truth?
> To get out of a special pleading fallacy you need demonstrable reasoning for the exclusion.
Sigh. I think we need to discontinue the conversation. I'll be glad to talk with you another time about other subjects.
Regardless of how one circumscribes good and evil, they are regarded as antithetical concepts.
> "we say that pain is evil"- No we don't. Pain is a biological response.
And "abuses" is a social perception. Are we going to discuss or give in to absurdity? If you want to go in this direction, please define "innocent" and "abuses" and "intercede" before we proceed.
> You're argument that you should give your God a pass on allowing evil because you believe you MIGHT have a greater plan is really disturbing. I want for a minute to imagine that you are witnessing but are helpless to rescue a 4 year old from being brutally raped and tortured. You hear their pained screams and their bones cracking and you would have the audacity to tell them that's is all worth it because God loves them and it's all worth it because He has a plan to comfort them? Allowing just one such situation to happen means God if he exists is not worth love let alone worship.
Wow. This is quite out of control. Please define "god," "evil," "greater," "disturbing.
> You hear their pained screams and their bones cracking and you would have the audacity to tell them that's is all worth it because God loves them and it's all worth it because He has a plan to comfort them?
This is wholesale and total distortion of everything we're talking about. With this kind of retort ("Good as the opposite of evil is an unsubstantiated assertion"; "this is all worth it because God loves them") I'm not sure we can proceed with this discussion. It's absurd. I didn't say any such thing. I didn't give God a pass. This isn't special pleading. I would never tell someone "it's all worth it because God has a plan to comfort you." You're not even interacting with me, but rather just creating edges and conflict.
> Allowing just one such situation to happen means God if he exists is not worth love let alone worship.
This statement indicates you didn't read what I said. Or you didn't process it at all.
> humanity is always thrown away by theists
?????? We throw away humanity?? I have to admit, I'm very frustrated in this conversation. What in the world are you talking about?
> This is where the saying, "Nobody feeds the homeless faster than an atheist," comes from.
????????
> Your whole premise relies on there being a God existing
Of...course...it...does.
> Your whole premise relies on there being a God existing which is faith.
No, there are many evidences for the existence of God.
> Because people can have faith and come to different conclusions about the same thing (the nature of God)
Scientists come to different conclusions about the nature of things (dark matter, gravity vs. electromagnetic force as the foundational force of the universe, whether humanity is contributing to global warming or whether it is a natural cycle). Are we to conclude that science is then not a reliable path to truth?
> To get out of a special pleading fallacy you need demonstrable reasoning for the exclusion.
Sigh. I think we need to discontinue the conversation. I'll be glad to talk with you another time about other subjects.
Last bumped by Anonymous on Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:36 am.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
12 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Return to Assorted Bible Questions
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest