Thread replies: 13
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
File: 1482746050208.png (72KB, 230x230px) Image search:
[Google]
72KB, 230x230px
I don't want to really argue about the existence of God overall but I just want to discuss a subsection of that debate that shows up when the problem of evil is brought up.
Alot of philosophers and people in general note that it's the existence of evil that makes them doubt the existence of God. Fine. But tied to this discussion there is almost always the issue of morality, in the sense that accepting the existence of evil is a claim made from a moral position, even if it is a temporary acceptance to use against the God argument. (Evil is wrong or shouldn't happen)
Now the people who make this claim generally go on to espouse either a system of nihilism or they attempt to re-evaluate the system of morality traditionally tied to religious thinking E.G the objectiveness of morality.
The things that gets me is under the system of nihilism. or some form of existentialism, or the complete reevaluation of morality God's actions or lack thereof in terms of its relationship with human beings could probably make more sense if seen as God as a scientist or Artist
In fact God's subjective opinion (who would possibly at the very least most of the information scientific or otherwise) on how things should go would be the most informed opinion available. How is God not also an ubermensch, the ideal superior life form of the future?
Under the traditional system with an objective morality one may argue the concept of God as repulsive but how is such a creature not the most admirable or most worthy to be imitated or followed under a subjective system
>>
I just pooped my pants
>>
>>135815630
>evil exists therefore no God
>people die therefore no God
>i wont live to 300 therefore no God
>i wont live an infinitely long life of bliss therefore no God
>tall cliffs and bacteria and viruses that can possibly kill children exist therefore no God
These people change there supposedly objective standard of what kind of universe is moral enough (in their view) for God to have created it. How did they arrive at this standard they judge God by? Where is this reality they seem to compare everything to? It's a moving goalpost argument, when they are just mad that they aren't God themselves considering their self perceived perfection. These leftists demand perfection safe from evil and free will. Fascinating.
>>
>god is all knowing and thus everything that will ever happen in our existence is already predestined and known to him
>god creates universe
>god creates suffering
>god creates people
>god chooses to inflict suffering on his creations
It's not that the problem of evil disproves god, it simply says that if god does exist, he is the most evil things that exists.
>>
>>135815630
>>135815630
>lost it
bla bla you didn't say anything about how evil does or does not contradict the idea of god.
>>
>>135815630
I think the problem you're running into OP is that of morality.
Religions claim morality stems from them. Ditto governments. Ditto anyone in power.
But in reality, morality is constant. It's a set of existential guidelines that dictates how humans, as biological organisms, should behave so that they continue to live as successful organisms.
>>
>>135819593
To add on, nihilism is the natural result of a people who don't realize the reality of what I just mentioned above, but realize that Religion often employs a little bit too much magical trust.
I'm not saying religion is bad; to the contrary, it has done a lot of good.
Additionally, most people should never be atheist. It requires too much personal strength to reject degeneracy alone for many.
>>
>>135819870
Finally, the issue with evil is that it's not some magical bad guy all the time.
Evil is aberrant behavior, when manifested in humans. They're broken humans, defective, so to speak.
They are not compatible with the Natural Order.
>>
I stand with Saint Augustine of Hippo when he says that the evil is the absence of good (as dark is the absence of light, cold is the absence of heat, death is the absence of life and so on...) and God being the ultimate good.
Adam when sin, distance himself from God (therefore from good) and Christ is the movement from God towards humanity to end evil (humanity returning to God).
>>
File: 1490559801645.jpg (143KB, 1000x1000px) Image search:
[Google]
143KB, 1000x1000px
>>135818761
While I've found that there are some arguments that invalidate the "god creates suffering" argument, I can't justify the entire construct of existence.
According to Christian religions, human existence is basically makes universe-scale Hunger Games.
It's a trial by combat, where the contestants are not given enough to do what they would normally consider good, given free will.
A lot will fail, and get eternal punishment for an existence they had no control over.
I just can't get over that.
>>
>>135818761
>god is evil
No evil or temptation comes from God. Evil is of men soley, and is borne of Pride. You confuse evil and tragedy though. Which is a common mistake. Is a hurricane "evil"? To say God is evil for making air or weather is silly. Maybe you mean to say a God should have made a world of determined outcome where everyone has a perfect life? That isnt existence though is it? Anymore than a software program with determined outcome is alive. Adding free will and happenstance immediately interjected tragedy and the pride of men to decide to be evil, but then without it we're simply not alive.
>>
>>135819593
Therefore ape/bonabo morality = human morality
Oh wait...
>>
>>135822158
Are you being serious or are you just dicking around?
I'm honestly trying to help OP here.
I don't intend to get in an argument of semantics and splitting hairs with you.
But, just this once:
>ape/bonabo morality = human morality
Wrong. Also faggotry is wrong, and you can easily infer why from my previous posts.
Thread posts: 13
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2