Jump to content

Religion vs Atheism Book 2


Stubby

Recommended Posts

Nestor,

Okay.  So, creating sentient beings with free will and the ability to choose to harm each other is cruelty too?  Hell, we have to kill to live.  Is the creation of the Universe in a state of entropy cruelty by your standard?

Scott,

Is allowing suffering to continue when it is not only within your power to end it, but trivially within your power to end it, cruel? 

Please answer my question first, and I'll be happy to address yours. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nestor,

Okay.  So, creating sentient beings with free will and the ability to choose to harm each other is cruelty too?  Hell, we have to kill to live.  Is the creation of the Universe in a state of entropy cruelty by your standard?

I question the possibility of creating a sentient being with free will when you also control every variable of the universe. Given the amount of power a creator god wields even at the lesser end of the scale humans would have no more free will than a SIm. So yes to both questions. And still yes even if you prove free will without a doubt, interfering with someone's free will to harm others is not a bad thing. We try and stop murders, rapists. and thieves for a reason scot, and only a truly horrible person would comp[lain about interfering with those peoples free will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nestor,

I don't know.  What if to do so has implications we cannot see but are knowable to Christ and we cannot understand what those implications are.  I do not presume to judge a being that far beyond me.

Now, is entropy and mortality cruelty?

It's not clear to me exactly what you're saying. 

(1) Are you saying that you don't know whether it's cruel for a person to allow suffering to continue when it is, trivially, within their power to end it? 

(2) Or are you really suggesting that Christ is a "special case" and that we can't judge by him the conventional standards of morality that we would judge actual human beings with? 

Because I asked you a moral question of general applicability and the first sentence of your response indicates that you think (1), but the second sentence of your response indicates that you think (2) - which is just a form of special pleading.

So please clarify for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TM,

I don't believe God to be truely omnipotent such that God can obviate paradox without consequence.

I didn't say omnipotent, I said creator god. Or do you not believe that your god created the universe and as such controls every variable? I mean you might, but you'd be in a distinct minority when it comes to monotheists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nestor,

Okay.  So, creating sentient beings with free will and the ability to choose to harm each other is cruelty too?  Hell, we have to kill to live.  Is the creation of the Universe in a state of entropy cruelty by your standard?

Ignoring the debate on whether or not we have free will (we don't), violence is ingrained into human psychology, indeed human psychology is exactly what we would expect to see to close relatives of chimpanzees and gorillas. Indeed without harming each other or any specific cruelties, life from the beginning is hardship, is pain and suffering.

Any god that created humanity, used a process which, over millions of years, caused unimaginable suffering and pain to billions of thinking beings, and essentially created humans, a species of self aware beings, for his own amusement; an eternal being that created intelligence so that the people could live lives of hardship and mortality.

 

And yes, I would say that existence as we know it is a form of cruelty if it were inflicted upon us by a being with the ability to stop it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nestor,

I believe Christ is a special case as we cannot know, fully, what Christ ment by his healings why they were undertaken and what the consequences of such healings would be or would have been.  

TM,

I'm confused by your question.  Yes I believe in a creator God.  That is not the same thing as believing in a fully omnioptent God.  Are you saying creating free will equals cruety?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TM,

I'm confused by your question.  Yes I believe in a creator God.  That is not the same thing as believing in a fully omnioptent God.  Are you saying creating free will equals cruety?

I'm saying that in any situation where the universe was created and the being that created it controlled all variables there can be no free will. Everything that happened happened entirely based on those initial variables, and would if done against happen the exact same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SAH,

And if the possiblity of cruelty is the necessary cost of free will God was wrong to allow humanity to evolve with that choice as a possiblity?  God was cruel to allow us to evolve?  Non-existence is preferable to this existence with a deity to gave it to us?  Wow, isn't that pure nihilism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SAH,

And if the possiblity of cruelty is the necessary cost of free will God was wrong to allow humanity to evolve with that choice as a possiblity?  God was cruel to allow us to evolve?  Non-existence is preferable to this existence with a deity to gave it to us?  Wow, isn't that pure nihilism?

Clearly not all suffering comes at the hands of other humans- there is also disease, for instance. So even if God must allow some cruelty as the necessary cost of allowing free will, there is still all sorts of cruelty he could stop easily. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly not all suffering comes at the hands of other humans- there is also disease, for instance. So even if God must allow some cruelty as the necessary cost of allowing free will, there is still all sorts of cruelty he could stop easily. 

OAR,

How can you know that?  What if the existence of the disease that causes illness was a necessary side consequence of the evloution of a conscious being?  What if there are broader consquences to magically eliminating all illness that we cannot see?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly not all suffering comes at the hands of other humans- there is also disease, for instance. So even if God must allow some cruelty as the necessary cost of allowing free will, there is still all sorts of cruelty he could stop easily. 

So, basically God's existence is measured by the quantity of pain in our lives? I am sorry, but the idea that the God is false just because there are bad things happening in the world is, IMO, one of the problems in this discussions. The problem I see with this opinion is that it completely misses the point of many religions.

In my opinion, bad things happen alongside with the good ones. Sometimes it doesn't seem fair, but living in the world where both concepts exist demand a bit of unfairness (speaking from human POV). God doesn't represent the magical solution for the problems. The religion doesn't work that way and the more we try to turn it into some sort of easy way out, the less sense it makes. I do believe that everything in the world has its own purpose. I don't think that when I get cold, I will go to church and suddenly be better (and the notion is hysterical for me) but I do believe it is just part of the good and the bad happening to me. Yes, there are times I ask, why me? But I am aware of my inability to comprehend it and if somethings happen that seems random, I deal with the usual "C'est la vie". 

What I want to say is that sometimes I think that atheists' have rather wrong approach to the religion. Because there are believers who made the peace that God is not there to fulfill every little desire we have and that he won't solve us the problems just because we went X number of times to church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Risto,

Exactly, In a perfect universe where nothing "bad" ever happens how would we know our existence is "good" with no "bad" to compare it to?  The alternative that it is wrong for us to exist in anything but perfection, again, seems like a resort to nihilism.

You know, for someone who doesn't "presume to judge a being that far beyond me" you sure have a good idea of what this deities limitations are. Can create a universe, isn't able to give human being's the ability to understand good without AIDs existing apparently.

So, basically God's existence is measured by the quantity of pain in our lives? I am sorry, but the idea that the God is false just because there are bad things happening in the world is, IMO, one of the problems in this discussions. The problem I see with this opinion is that it completely misses the point of many religions.

The actual argument here is about the morality of such a being, not its existence. I don't have to argue it's existence, I get to dismiss it out of hand because there's never been any evidence for any deity ever. But for the moment I'm willing to accept the premise "god is true" because I'm bored and I find the debate interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...