When asked about why evil exists in a world created by a loving god, a theist will often reply that it is all part of their god's plan, i.e. any evil that occurs in the world is not god being evil, but rather due to us failing to understand how it is good. In this vein, they suggest that there are two standards of morality, the human morality that says it is wrong to allow a child to die of a hideous disease, and god's incomprehensible morality that evidently supports this.
The problem here is that if we accept that there is dissonance between our and god's morality, there may be similiar dissonance elsewhere, for example in the definition of love. If we love someone, then we would never do anything to hurt them. God, however, is according to some prepared to send his creations to hell for not following his rules. This line of thinking now becomes disturbing. What if god's incomprehensible version of love is to decieve us, to convince us of his existence through miracles or through scientific proof (not yet seen) but then punish those who believe in him and follow his rules. Remember, this is highly plausible from what we have already seen; if god thinks allowing people to suffer in this world is love, then mabye deception and (human) injustice are also what he/she views as love. God is described in the bible as truthful (2 Samuel 7:28), but ignoring this blatant begging the question (god is trustworthy because he says so), what if god views truth as different? What if ideas have different meanings for god and us as has already been demonstrated with other words? What if we simply "cannot comprehend" the real nature of truth?
As we do not know the probability distribution of god, we can not say that a truthful god is more likely than a deceptive one, and so nothing is to be gained from worshiping him/her should his/her existence ever be shown to be true. Appealing to incomprehensibility is not a wise strategy,
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
The whole concept is a bunch of non sense. To even discuss this stuff in the intimate detail that is sometimes done on this website...with all this philosophical, and spiritual bullshit, is giving leverage to something that is so outrageous, and ridiculous that it defies any human logic, reason, or common sense. But what I've learned, is that is precisely what people want...for some reason, that I still am unable to comprehend, people WANT to believe in this stuff...it makes them feel " comfortable," safe, or whatever. It is really pathetic, when you think about it...that people have to believe in a fantasy to go on with their lives in an orderly, moral, manner. ( guess what...its not working!!!)
What god ?
The so-called god many refer to as Yaweh is not an entity people should aspire to. He/she what ever you want to call it, is a perverted, pathetic piece of crap. If you worship this: do as I say and not as I do bully, then Yaweh is the god for you.
here we go again with the foul mouthed, hateful, ever insulting atheist rant about how bad god is. atheists dont believe in god yet hate the god they dont believe in. does that make sense? atheist love to hate god that killed evil people that sacraficed their own children, committed perverted acts and would not repent after many warnings, many chances. i guess atheists would prefer god keep around these evil people?
But, God isn't supposed to want to kill ANYBODY!! He's supposed to LOVE everybody, no matter how many "chances they were given...WHY is there so much killing..."THOU SHALT NOT KILL!!" It turns out, that the more religious people are the more killing they want to do!!
I didn't quite catch what you meant to say here....
'atheists would prefer god keep around these evil people'?
...What?
Now, as far as hating god(s), that is a rather large misnomer. I think sometimes people come across that way, but we really can't hate something that doesn't exist. I think there is a lot of bottled-up angst, though against the religions themselves....
So it's more like we hate/dislike/are disgusted by the 'character' god/yahweh. Just like you might hate the villain in an action movie you see, that sorta thing.
But venting is good on sites like this... You won't get stoned by people in the street, fired from your job or have to flee your country because you vent your frustration with religion here.
...Not many places to do that openly just yet. So take this site with a grain of salt, so to speak... People may sound angry and hateful, but I think it's mostly frustration with the dominance of religion in modern society.
here we go again with the foul mouthed, hateful, ever insulting atheist rant about how bad god is. atheists dont believe in god yet hate the god they dont believe in. does that make sense? atheist love to hate god that killed evil people that sacraficed their own children, committed perverted acts and would not repent after many warnings, many chances. i guess atheists would prefer god keep around these evil people?
here we go again with the foul mouthed, hateful, ever insulting atheist rant about how bad god is. atheists dont believe in god yet hate the god they dont believe in. does that make sense? atheist love to hate god that killed evil people that sacraficed their own children, committed perverted acts and would not repent after many warnings, many chances. i guess atheists would prefer god keep around these evil people?
here we go again with the foul mouthed, hateful, ever insulting atheist rant about how bad god is. atheists dont believe in god yet hate the god they dont believe in. does that make sense? atheist love to hate god that killed evil people that sacraficed their own children, committed perverted acts and would not repent after many warnings, many chances. i guess atheists would prefer god keep around these evil people?
Because posting multiple times means correctness!
On the question of what Stephen Fry would say if he found himself confronted by God at the pearly gates (assuming the god of Christianity), Stephen answered:
"bone cancer in children? What’s that about?
How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery that is not our fault. It’s not right, it’s utterly, utterly evil. Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a world that is so full of injustice and pain."
I totally agree. If you ask a creationist if they think genocide is wrong, hopefully they say yes. If you then bring up Noah's ark, God is somehow above something that if committed by a human would be considered delplorable.
have u people not read old testament scripture? these people that god wiped out were evil, unrepentant people that hated god just as u do. why has this slipped ur mind ? today we give these types the death penalty i guess thats ok to kill evil people today but not old testament loosers
Old testament, new testament...always makes me laugh. The " old" testament was so outrageous, it had to be rewritten into the "new" testament. ( just how "new is this thing, anyway...how many thousands of years...I think it's time to write another book!!) Bill Maher debated one of these religious fanatics ( on youtube) and kept pointing out how outrageous some of this stuff was ( such as any woman engaging in sex before marriage shall be stoned), and the fanatic would answer, "did you read the new testament...thats not in there." Are you kidding...keep rewrting these preposturous stories trying to make them more believable to gullible people...what a joke!!
Funny that this 'god' forgot about intervening powers during the holocaust, no?
The old testament is a fictional book, written by imaginative people, nothing more or less.
There was no catastrophic flood of global proportions, no 'Noah's ark', they were all stories.
Plus... You can't compare the death penalty (which in the US at least is seldom ever carried out now, < 20 people annually) with a slaying of millions + by some bent deity.
Collateral damage, man. It's never right, deity or not! Those evil people's kids, man... They were in on it too, eh? If the stories were hypothetically true, that is.
But, you don't understand, Nordic... things like the Holocaust were "FREE WILL!" God gives people "free will" to do whatever they want..and it is the HUMANS that have ruined His perfect world, and perfect creations!! This is the logic that you will get from a theist!!
Ahhh, too true.... The classic circular theist arguments do come up a lot don't they? :D
Little girl gets her head smashed into a brick wall by a drunk driving a Dodge Ram.... "It was god's plan."
Thousands of 'gods people' are killed by fanatical blackshirts.... "Nah freewill bro."
Thank you, reality for pulling me out of that fire.... I keep forgetting that arguing with a theist is like trying to cut a watermelon with a banana. :D
Hey Nordic, like your posts. As far as the girl being smashed by a drunk, the theist answer may not be " it was Gods plan," that would make it too obvious that they were admitting that God had something to do with that...the answer that I have heard for stuff like that is more like," well, what do you want to live in a perfect world," or "God works in mysterious ways, we can't explain it all." Or, "God called her to be with Him." Strange how God needed that girl MORE than her parents at such a young age...kind of a selfish God, don't you think??!!
Hey Nordic...I forgot to add...if you really want to know if there is a God or not, just look at the Unicef, or St Jude commercials...that answers any qustions.
I totally agree. If you ask a creationist if they think genocide is wrong, hopefully they say yes. If you then bring up Noah's ark, God is somehow above something that if committed by a human would be considered delplorable.
Having children has nothing to do with theism, or atheism. It has to do with 2 people who are commited to each other ( whether they are married or not- ever REALLY listen to the marriage "vows" in a church? ...then look at the statistics of how many "religious people" REALLY DO what those vows say??!!...not very many!!) who want to raise a family. It is up to the PARENTS to bring the child up right, nurtue it, love it, give it what it needs to sustain life and grow. ( and yes, there are people who should NOT be having children, theist or not!!) Of course,theists will say that "God" is the oneresponsible for these things, whereas it is our point that God has nothing to do with it. The point being, that if there is a God, and he is almighty, controls everything, and is capable of anything, why does He allow His creatiions, especially children, to suffer?? He recieves the accolades for good things that happen...it is said that all good is His doing, so the logical question would be why does He allow human suffering, especially children?? ( Lets see what kind of crazy excuse there is for that!!)
I don't think there is any dissonance between God's morality and human morality. The attempts at morality that God has made can easily be derived from the common sense of MAN, and more importantly the illiterate ancient MAN. If there is a case that God doesn't uphold to these teachings it simply means that God is immoral, or that he doesn't exist.
Mintaka - "The resurrection. Vishnu, Buddha and Allah never died and rose again and talked and ate and fellowshipped with their disciples afterward. "
Neither did Yahweh.
@Mintaka
First of, Buddha was not a god at all.
Secondly, examples of dying and then resurrected gods are abundant.
Many have also been born of a virgin. Perhaps you should read a bit more than only what you have been told is true.
Mintaka-
"But you do have the power to refrain from procreation and ultimately prevent another human being from coming into existence. Knowing the inevitability of suffering though, many atheists have children anyway. They deliberately chose to do so, knowing full well (in a general sense) their offspring will be subject to pain and suffering of some kind."
Yes but unlike your god we do not have the power to prevent it without denying children the pleasure of life and love.
We choose to make children experience life because suffering is just a small part of life, you are assuming that suffering is the main thing without knowing.
It is only a problem if there is a god that can remove it but doesn't because he enjoys it.
Yes according to the bible he created hell just for his enjoyment, where he could just as easily removed most evil while keeping the good parts.
Just look how much he enjoyed having his son tortured unjustly just because he cannot bring himself to forgive.
God is omnipotent, and there would be no need to threaten people with hell or punishment if he wishes it, he can put reason and goodness in the heart of people anytime he wants, without touching their free will or character.
Yes he can, else he is no god worth of worship.
This has gotten so ridiculous that I must bow out now and put my time to more useful,SENSIBLE things!!
Agreed. Are all the christians who participate in these forums as slippery and slimy as this one? Confronted with the evilness of his imaginary god, he just ignores it and goes blathering on and on about how atheists shouldn't have children. But he spews his obvious hatred so politely!
Great video...but the BEST was watching ARONRA tear apart that idiot regarding the 10 Commandments!! Needing God to know if something is immoral, or wrong...what a bunch of bullshit!!! How can people actually believe this shit??!!
Mintaka - "1. What is the nature of evil? Is it objectively real? Is it universal? Or is it merely subjective and relative to particular cultures?"
The latter (subjective) and typically based on cultural. That is why we see what seems to be double standards, for example: most people would agree that it is evil to grab kids in your neighbourhood and light them on fire. But the very same people might not think it is evil to dump napalm/white phosphorous on brown skinned kids on the other side of the world.
Mintaka - 'Perhaps I should have simply said, "Why an algorithm?" '
I address this somewhat below, but for now: algorithms typically no not rely on personal views to reach a conclusion, a feature you are going to need to establish your morality as objective.
-----------------
Mintaka - "the issue at hand remains your critique of another community's moral paradigm (i.e. that "mine" was subjective)"
I'm assuming your morality is subjective until you can present a "g̲e̲n̲e̲r̲a̲l̲l̲y̲ ̲a̲c̲c̲e̲p̲t̲e̲d̲ ̲c̲r̲i̲t̲e̲r̲i̲a̲.̲..t̲h̲a̲t̲ ̲w̲o̲u̲l̲d̲ ̲b̲e̲ ̲c̲o̲m̲p̲e̲l̲l̲i̲n̲g̲ ̲f̲o̲r̲ ̲a̲n̲y̲ ̲r̲a̲t̲i̲o̲n̲a̲l̲ ̲b̲e̲i̲n̲g̲" (from my other post). You clearly have not done this, as there is an abundance of rational beings (just on this site, for starters) who are not compelled. Therefore until you preform the previously mentioned step, I will continue to assume your morality is subjective.
It may seem to you that I have erected an impossible hurdle that you are doomed to fail at crossing, and I am somewhat inclined to agree. However, if your morality really is subjective, then it should be impossible for you to cross this hurdle anyway. You might ask yourself: does the impossibility of this task stem from some unreasonableness of Nyarlathotep or does it actually stem from trying to pass off something that is subjective as something that is objective? Other objective subjects can pass this hurdle quite easily...
There is no way from me to establish that your morality is subjective. However, there is a method (at least in principle) to establish that is objective (see above). Therefore we must set the null hypothesis as morality is subjective. Anything else would be madness (www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/how-do-i-cut-through-all-nois...). Can you demonstrate the null hypothesis is incorrect?
-----------------
Pages