Could A Good God Permit So Much Suffering?

[Cypress]

I do not give a shit about spirituality.

I referenced your comment that white Europeans and North Americans are more rational than the global south.

The fact that Hindus and Muslims from South Asia have won Nobel prizes in physics tells me that being religious and being from the global south does not preclude rationality.

 

[Based Chad]

Nice work.

We have definitely moved the discourse past longstanding atheist claims that believing in theism is just as irrational and unreasonable as believing in invisible leprechauns.

There's no question theism can be based on reason and logical inference.

I would modify to say the classical Christian apologist position is not only based the appearance of the universe out of nothing 13.7 billion years ago.

The classical Christian apologist reasoning for theism is based on multiple, mutually supporting lines of rational reasoning.

There is your cosmological argument.

There is the teleological argument.

There is the moral argument.

And there is the witness testimony about Jesus, at least the reliable parts.


I think the cosmological argument and teleological argument are pretty powerful. There really is no convincing argument to really undermine them at this time.

it is just as irrational.

the actual point is morality which you obviously don't possess since you support genocide based on some psychotic heretical version of "judeo-christianity", which isn't a thing.

 

[Based Chad]

This is very interesting. You seem to be defending Christianity as rational and reasonable and clearly the version of God you are defending here. But I'm curious why if you follow it up with saying you are thinking it is possible Jesus didn't die on the cross.

So why would you defend a religion whose core concept you seem to either not be certain of or which you understand somewhat incompletely?

If Christianity is a rational belief system one must be absolutely 100% certain of the death on the cross. The sacrifice is what makes the religion.

no the golden rule makes the religion.

that's the revolution of morality in that it rejects the tribalism/racism of judaism.

 

[Hume]

I referenced your comment that white Europeans and North Americans are more rational than the global south.

The fact that Hindus and Muslims from South Asia have won Nobel prizes in physics tells me that being religious and being from the global south does not preclude rationality.

look...I find religion boring...really do not care

 

[Cypress]

look...I find religion boring...really do not care

You're the one who started this thread on religion.

 

[Cypress]

L

This is very interesting. You seem to be defending Christianity as rational and reasonable and clearly the version of God you are defending here. But I'm curious why if you follow it up with saying you are thinking it is possible Jesus didn't die on the cross.

I can defend the rational basis of Adam Smith, Karl Marx, and CS Lewis, without having to agree with everything they said or did.

The underlying premise of the original post is to question the rationality of Christianity. That's a standard atheist tactic. Unless we want this to be a board where nobody ever disagrees, I decided to jump in with an alternate viewpoint. I think there is a rational basis for theism, whether it be Christianity, Buddhism, or Rabbinic Judaism.

So why would you defend a religion whose core concept you seem to either not be certain of or which you understand somewhat incompletely?

If Christianity is a rational belief system one must be absolutely 100% certain of the death on the cross. The sacrifice is what makes the religion.

See my answers above

 

[Margot]

I think the God of the Jews abandoned this rock.

Well ,there's an Israel in the center of the worlds Drama!
Melchizedek has been dispatched for "The Harvest" it's the calm before the storm! So never fear YHWH is on the job!

 

[Margot]

It's generally a white male of European descent who believes miracles and transcendent experiences are impossible. Billions of brown, black, and Asian people are convinced there are miracles and a transcendent reality. I'm not going to be the great European colonialist and tell them their ideas are idiotic.

Atheists believe in miracles too. The miracle that something can come from nothing, that order and design can come from chaos.

All ancient literature contains hyperbole, metaphor, exaggeration, misinformation.
That includes Herodotus, Thucydides, and the New Testament. They did not have the same understanding of analytical history and biography that we do.

The only things you really need to believe in to be Christian is:
1) There was an itinerant Jewish rabbi and healer named Jesus who taught in and around Galilee.
2) Jesus was crucified by Pontius Pilate.
3) The followers of Jesus came to genuinely believe they saw him after his crucifixion.

Even the great atheist biblical scholar Bart Ehrman agrees these three beliefs are based on reliable witness testimony. The only question remaining is if the disciples were all hallucinating, or not.


If you can't use inanimate materialism to offer a better explanation for the order, design, and creation of the universe, then you are telling me either you are agnostic, or that you can't give any convincing arguments that would undermine the theist lines of reasoning.

The lowest common denominator is Jesus came as Passover Lamb ,so at the final "Passover" the "Harvest" ,Apollyon will be able to Passover those that have drank the blood and ate the flesh of the Passover Lamb Jesus! What Catholics call the Eucharist!

 

[Based Chad]

I can defend the rational basis of Adam Smith, Karl Marx, and CS Lewis, without having to agree with everything they said or did.

The underlying premise of the original post is to question the rationality of Christianity. That's a standard atheist tactic. Unless we want this to be a board where nobody ever disagrees, I decided to jump in with an alternate viewpoint. I think there is a rational basis for theism, whether it be Christianity, Buddhism, or Rabbinic Judaism.

See my answers above

yes. morality is the rational basis.

you're just a babblin fucking idiot.

 

[TravisBickle]

Well ,there's an Israel in the center of the worlds Drama!
Melchizedek has been dispatched for "The Harvest" it's the calm before the storm! So never fear YHWH is on the job!

Numbers 31
Vengeance on the Midianites
1And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 2“Take vengeance on the Midianites for the children of Israel. Afterward you shall be gathered to your people.”
3So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm some of yourselves for war, and let them go against the Midianites to take vengeance for the Lord on Midian. 4A thousand from each tribe of all the tribes of Israel you shall send to the war.”
5So there were recruited from the divisions of Israel one thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. 6Then Moses sent them to the war, one thousand from each tribe; he sent them to the war with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, with the holy articles and the signal trumpets in his hand. 7And they warred against the Midianites, just as the Lord commanded Moses, and they killed all the males. 8They killed the kings of Midian with the rest of those who were killed—Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Midian. Balaam the son of Beor they also killed with the sword.
9And the children of Israel took the women of Midian captive, with their little ones, and took as spoil all their cattle, all their flocks, and all their goods. 10They also burned with fire all the cities where they dwelt, and all their forts. 11And they took all the spoil and all the booty—of man and beast.

 

[Based Chad]

Numbers 31
Vengeance on the Midianites
1And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 2“Take vengeance on the Midianites for the children of Israel. Afterward you shall be gathered to your people.”
3So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm some of yourselves for war, and let them go against the Midianites to take vengeance for the Lord on Midian. 4A thousand from each tribe of all the tribes of Israel you shall send to the war.”
5So there were recruited from the divisions of Israel one thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. 6Then Moses sent them to the war, one thousand from each tribe; he sent them to the war with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, with the holy articles and the signal trumpets in his hand. 7And they warred against the Midianites, just as the Lord commanded Moses, and they killed all the males. 8They killed the kings of Midian with the rest of those who were killed—Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Midian. Balaam the son of Beor they also killed with the sword.
9And the children of Israel took the women of Midian captive, with their little ones, and took as spoil all their cattle, all their flocks, and all their goods. 10They also burned with fire all the cities where they dwelt, and all their forts. 11And they took all the spoil and all the booty—of man and beast.

have you looked into Christianity?

its not as inherenty violent or racist.

 

[Hume]

You're the one who started this thread on religion.

Not about religion. You really have a hard time understanding things.

 

[Cypress]

Not about religion. You really have a hard time understanding things.

Your original post seemed like it was directly and unequivocally related to religion and to questioning it's rationality -->

Could A Good God Permit So Much Suffering?
God is omnipotent; God is wholly good; and yet evil exists. There seems to be some contradiction between these three propositions, so that if any two of them were true the third would be false. But at the same time all three are essential parts of most theological positions:

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Your original post seemed like it was directly and unequivocally related to religion and to questioning it's rationality -->

She hates religion and anyone who proposes anything positive about it. Weird, but no uncommon with young people still "finding themselves". Confident people usually don't give a shit unless it's something affecting them personally like certain laws.

 

[Based Chad]

She hates religion and anyone who proposes anything positive about it. Weird, but no uncommon with young people still "finding themselves". Confident people usually don't give a shit unless it's something affecting them personally like certain laws.

this is level one NPC.

any pushback at all on their dumb bullshit and it's immediately into "I didn't say that" mode.

 

[Cypress]

She hates religion and anyone who proposes anything positive about it. Weird, but no uncommon with young people still "finding themselves". Confident people usually don't give a shit unless it's something affecting them personally like certain laws.

You have to question the fair mindedness of anyone who is relentlessly 100 percent negative about religion, or on the flipside anyone who is 100 percent unwilling to question theological dogma and biblical inerrancy.

Joel Osteen and Richard Dawkins are both on that spectrum.

 

[gmark77]

You have to question the fair mindedness of anyone who is relentlessly 100 percent negative about religion, or on the flipside anyone who is 100 percent unwilling to question theological dogma and biblical inerrancy.

Joel Osteen and Richard Dawkins are both on that spectrum.

I think this is where you misunderstand atheism. You keep pointing to Dawkins, but Dawkins isn't all atheists. He's just one of the few who actually writes about what some think. And good on him. We've enjoyed two millennia of people forcing Christianity into every nook and cranny of our society, so at least give us a couple of people who say "The emperor has no clothes".

Most of us are just regular folks IRL and you wouldn't be able to tell that we don't believe as you do. Most of us are like most Christians and just keep quiet about who we are and what we believe.

What most defensors fides such as yourself seem to dislike is any overt atheism. Just like most of us hate hearing non-stop about Jesus this and Jesus that from the people selling us hamburgers and chicken sandwiches.

So yeah, I get it. You dislike hearing anything from atheists anywhere. But it's not a fair match. The Jesus folks way outnumber the atheist folks. So where's the harm in 4 or 5 books which question the faith when there are about a billion books which laud the faith and justify it.

By now you've stopped reading so I feel confident in saying this openly and loudly: yes there is good in the New Testament. There really honestly is. But that GOOD doesn't HAVE to be from the Bible. It's common sense to treat others well in a society. It's inherent in our species to find murder wrong etc. People didn't need Jesus to tell them to be decent just because Jesus did so.

What is problematic is that people make POLICY based on their imagination of what God is and what God wants. That's the problem. And people demand that SCIENCE back off when it touches onto things the religious don't like. It DENIES facts when they don't comport with the FAITH. And it is at the heart of countless fights and wars going on today.

We dislike fake Christians like the owners of Hobby Lobby who leverage their disingenuous belief in Jesus to deny women employees healthcare they don't like and then those same Hobby Lobbians turn around and steal priceless artifacts from around the world for their "Bible museum", or they partake of deceptive sales practices and get hammered by the Atty General of NY. We dislike our tax money going to overtly support religions we don't believe in.

Religion is also useful in human conflict. Not necessary but really useful. Just look at Israel for a moment: we have two people fighting over a plot of dusty land because one of them thinks God gave it to them millennia ago because it's in some book somewhere. And countless evangelicals in the USA DEMAND that the war continue so that it can lead to the END OF THE WORLD and the RETURN OF JESUS.

We make policy based on imagination and wishes. That is why some atheists speak out against religion.

NOT because all religion is ipso facto horrible, but because religion is unique in that it defies questioning and it can overcome "facts" by merit of the demands of the believer.

What's wrong with being 100% against imagination-based policy?

And please don't resort to your usual "Christianity is the basis of Western Civilization". That doesn't make Christianity necessarily TRUE nor necessarily GOOD all the time.

In fact the very fact that Christianity is the basis of Western Civilization is enough to convince one that Christianity carries ZERO weight when people want to do truly horrible and evil things. Often in the explicit name of their religion and their civilization. One cannot look at the modern world and say we are necessarily more moral than the ancients who did exactly the same shit we do.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You have to question the fair mindedness of anyone who is relentlessly 100 percent negative about religion, or on the flipside anyone who is 100 percent unwilling to question theological dogma and biblical inerrancy.

Joel Osteen and Richard Dawkins are both on that spectrum.

Agreed, which is why I suspect she's under 35 and probably under 30. Anyone like that who is older most certainly has mental issues.

It's also why I suspect she's a college dropout; not stupid but certainly angry, bitter and young. That can't be said of others on the forum such as MAGAts who are old, bitter and stupid.

 

[Cypress]

Agreed, which is why I suspect she's under 35 and probably under 30. Anyone like that who is older most certainly has mental issues.

It's also why I suspect she's a college dropout; not stupid but certainly angry, bitter and young. That can't be said of others on the forum such as MAGAts who are old, bitter and stupid.

I think when you scratch beneath the surface, most garden-variety atheists are actually somewhere on the spectrum of Agnostic - Cultural Christian - or Pantheist.

Only the most militant are willing to live out the atheist project to it's logical conclusion consistently in real life: by embracing moral relativism, the subjectivity of values, and uncompromising physical materialism, and accepting that in the end it's all meaningless and ultimately there is nothing out there but the howling void. That's what Albert Camus was willing to do in his heyday.

 

[gmark77]

I think when you scratch beneath the surface, most garden-variety atheists are actually somewhere on the spectrum of Agnostic - Cultural Christian - Pantheist.

Just so long as the atheist isn't allowed to define their philosophy.

Only the most militant are willing to live out the atheist project consistently in real life

Who are these "militant atheists"? Are these like the no true scotsmen?

: by embracing moral relativism, and accepting that in the end it's all meaningless and ultimately there is nothing out there but the howling void.

And that seems to be incomprehensible to you. I understand. It's not for everyone. Some people need that "safety blanket" to clutch when the shit hits the fan. I truly do understand it.

There's a great line from Chris Cornell in an Audioslave song: "And on my deathbed, I will pray to the gods and the angels, like a pagan to anyone who will take me to heaven".

It's a reasonable thought and it certainly may be the case for some atheists, but not because suddenly truth was revealed in objective fact but rather that jive-old "fear of the unknown" that religion makes so much use of to cajole people into accepting that which is presented without evidence.

We all share that fear. It's what we do in response that makes the difference. Do we retreat into wishful thinking or do we face the unvarnished reality without bell or whistle.