End all Suffering now? you have the power.

[Mark 13:13]

Picture the scenario; you as an athiest have now become the leader of a nation with very advanced technology. You are the full authority, there is no one to answer to and all power to rule is yours. Your scientists have developed a new device so powerful they call it the supernova. It is designed to be the ultimate deterrent from aggression as in 1 push of a button, the one now blinking green on your desktop, the world will be obliterated in a flash so fast that everyone would be dead so fast that the wouldn't even experience pain. The earth would dissappear in one brilliant flash and then nothing.

You believe that death is final, no life after no God to meet. You look at the world around and see that people continue to suffer from all the normal pains, griefs, heartaches, relationship problems. Natural disasters continue to occur. Nations and groups still find reasons for war. The poor continue to be poor and the nutcases still erupt with deadly results. You could end the whole thing in a painless moment and all suffering would be gone in an instant. Everyone is going to die anyway this would be painless for all.

Would you press the button and end suffering?

if not why?

The real question is, why, as a Christian, would you not want to end the earth?

After all, Christian dogma states that this life is a quick (70 years or so) stopover on the way to eternal life with 'God', right?

As a Christian, ending the earth would solve many problems.

1. All Christians would immediately go to heaven. Why would you want to delay that?

2. Infants would instantly go to heaven. Why would you want to take the chance that they may be corrupted by 'evil' and end up in hell? Better to assure they go to heaven by ending their lives early, right?

3. The vast majority of those of us destined for eternal suffering, will not be 'saved' in our lifetimes. The few that might get 'saved' are offset by the infants that might become corrupted.

As a Christian. what are the downsides?

We can't upsurp Gods authority over one life let alone millions.

[Simon Moon]

We can't upsurp Gods authority over one life let alone millions.

What if the Christian leader with access to the button, claimed 'God' communicated with him and told him to push the button?

EDIT: What if 'God' told you that he wanted you to push the button?

It wouldn't be the first time 'God' destroyed the world and started over, right?

[Brian37]

The real question is, why, as a Christian, would you not want to end the earth?

After all, Christian dogma states that this life is a quick (70 years or so) stopover on the way to eternal life with 'God', right?

As a Christian, ending the earth would solve many problems.

1. All Christians would immediately go to heaven. Why would you want to delay that?

2. Infants would instantly go to heaven. Why would you want to take the chance that they may be corrupted by 'evil' and end up in hell? Better to assure they go to heaven by ending their lives early, right?

3. The vast majority of those of us destined for eternal suffering, will not be 'saved' in our lifetimes. The few that might get 'saved' are offset by the infants that might become corrupted.

As a Christian. what are the downsides?

We can't upsurp Gods authority over one life let alone millions.

See if you can spot the pattern?

"We can't usurp the authority of Allah"
"We can't usurp the authority of Vishnu"
"We can't usurp the authority of Yahweh"
"We can't usurp the authority of Osirus"
"We can't usurp the authority of "The Force".

The difference between the authority in civil pluralistic reality, is that we can subject our leaders to review and hold them to account.

Once you claim a divine power, pick any of the list above, you have subjected yourself to the slavery of a utopia, and are not accepting our common reality, but merely are in want of a super hero.

[jonb]

As an Absurdist, I have to say the notion of tasking life, is as absurd as the intellectual suicide of constricting oneself to a set of beliefs.

Now as a christian Mark are you looking forward to the second coming?

[Brian37]

As an Absurdist, I have to say the notion of tasking life, is as absurd as the intellectual suicide of constricting oneself to a set of beliefs.

Now as a christian Mark are you looking forward to the second coming?

Once any society sets up a super hero in the form of a state or a god pluralism is the first victim.

Futurama had a good indictment on this concept of absolutes. It depicted in that episode a moon that had been taken over by the vacation and travel industry. In it they had a Redneck driving a moon rover with a bumper sticker with the slogan "The moon shall rise again".

[genkaus]

Picture the scenario; you as an athiest have now become the leader of a nation with very advanced technology. You are the full authority, there is no one to answer to and all power to rule is yours. Your scientists have developed a new device so powerful they call it the supernova. It is designed to be the ultimate deterrent from aggression as in 1 push of a button, the one now blinking green on your desktop, the world will be obliterated in a flash so fast that everyone would be dead so fast that the wouldn't even experience pain. The earth would dissappear in one brilliant flash and then nothing.

You believe that death is final, no life after no God to meet. You look at the world around and see that people continue to suffer from all the normal pains, griefs, heartaches, relationship problems. Natural disasters continue to occur. Nations and groups still find reasons for war. The poor continue to be poor and the nutcases still erupt with deadly results. You could end the whole thing in a painless moment and all suffering would be gone in an instant. Everyone is going to die anyway this would be painless for all.

Would you press the button and end suffering?

if not why?

Because I like cheesecake. If I destroy the world, there would be no more cheesecake for me.

[Kayenneh]

Occasionally they would hear a harsh croak or a splash as some amphibian was disturbed, but the only creature they saw was a toad as big as Will's foot, which could only flop in a pain-filled sideways heave as if it were horrible injured. It lay across the path, trying to move out of the way and looking at them as if it knew they meant to hurt it.
"It would be merciful to kill it," said Tialys.
"How do you know?" said Lyra. "It might still like being alive, in spite of everything."
"If we killed it, we'd be taking it with us," said Will. "It wants to stay here. I've killed enough living things. Even a filthy stagnant pool might be better than dead."
"But if it's in pain?" said Tialys.
"if it could tell us, we'd know. But since it can't, I'm not going to kill it. That would be considering our feelings rather than the toad's."

[Brian37]

So are you saying life is about so much more than suffering, there is so much joy also. ps the only right you have is that you have the power to do as you want the button is there. The only restriction being your judgement.

Of course it is. If life were only about suffering, most of us would probably commit suicide. There is suffering in the world, and all of us go through it at some point, some more than others. However, just because suffering exists does not mean we should give up. If anything, it means we should work together to try and eliminate as much of it as possible, so that everyone can experience the maximum joy.

Also, just because one has the power to do something does not mean they have the right to do it. I'm sure most governments have the power to mass exterminate their citizens, but it would never be right for them to do so.

It is totally foreign to people of all religions, that others outside their pet god claim can live life and enjoy it without an invisible friend.

Evolution was around long before all our current superstitions, or global politics or boarders. And someday our species will go extinct.

The universe did not invent volcano gods, or Apollo, or or Vishnu or Jesus or Allah. Those are products of human imagination. Life after an individual dies will be just like it was before we were born. Someday the planet will not support any life at all, it's core will stop, and eventually our sun will die too. The universe will continue with no record of any human and or the superstitions they invent.

Our species invents these artificial labels in the form of politics and religion as a coping mechanism as a way to create groups to foster greater chances of gaining resources thus creating more chances to make offspring.

[Esquilax]

Wow I really wish I had written that, soooooo true. You could say the same about nationalism and politics too.

The only downside is that we still need common law so in that rightful condemnation of squatting rights to authorship, you still don't want that to be hijacked by any anarchist or fascist.

Yes indeed, which is why I consider religion a method for disseminating the morality that we required for society to continue. In the past, it was probably necessary- that fear that kept people honest and so on, because there simply wasn't the kind of infrastructure in place, nor the technological means to properly execute it. And I think that, had religion never existed, something else would have filled that void.

But we've grown past the need for edicts from on high to lay out our morality for us now. We have the capabilities to define and protect the laws that allow our society to function. When theists claim that god is the source of all morality, they're just being dishonest, and that's the part that gets me. Religion functions by taking credit for great things we already had. We never really needed it to define anything.

[Brian37]

Wow I really wish I had written that, soooooo true. You could say the same about nationalism and politics too.

The only downside is that we still need common law so in that rightful condemnation of squatting rights to authorship, you still don't want that to be hijacked by any anarchist or fascist.

Yes indeed, which is why I consider religion a method for disseminating the morality that we required for society to continue. In the past, it was probably necessary- that fear that kept people honest and so on, because there simply wasn't the kind of infrastructure in place, nor the technological means to properly execute it. And I think that, had religion never existed, something else would have filled that void.

But we've grown past the need for edicts from on high to lay out our morality for us now. We have the capabilities to define and protect the laws that allow our society to function. When theists claim that god is the source of all morality, they're just being dishonest, and that's the part that gets me. Religion functions by taking credit for great things we already had. We never really needed it to define anything.

Well, while the need for a god is much like a child's need for Santa, I wouldn't say that placebos will ever go away.

Evolution does not depend on fact finding or pragmatism, and when we lose sight of the diversity that evolution is, both good and bad, that failure can and far too often leads to the chase of utopias, be they worship of a state or a god. When we forget this, even atheists, we are just of capable of cruelty as those we condemn.

Our modern understanding of science is creating a road where superstition and myth can no longer hide. But we cannot lose sight of our common existence which we are all part of.

One word solutions in the form of labels does not work anymore than evolution is monochromatic. "One size fits all" has never worked and cannot work. Life has always been diverse and always will be.

Clubs and boarders and labels will always exist, we are still a social species and always will be. I am simply suggesting a priority shift to what we have in common while still allowing differences to exist, and only through questioning, not force, can we ween people off clinging to bad claims or bad data.

Atheists are not a separate species and we are just as capable of doing any good act or bad act as any other label.