The Problem of Evil combined with the problem of Free Will

[Aroura]

I am actually guessing there is no God.  I'm just trying to understand those who continue to believe in him and believe him to be "good".  I'm pointing out they are the ones guessing, and making excuses.  They are the ones who have passed judgement and declared all of mankind guilty without evidence.

I already said my beliefs are subject to change.  Are yours?

You are still projecting.

No more changes about my beliefs since I discovered that God is within.
It didn't come all of a sudden like winning millions at Lottery.
The awareness came after a lot of hard work through yoga but if on top of that you also put the
NDEs experiences that confirm what I already believe then the reasons for a change become nil.  

I see, so if I have a solid belief, I need to be careful.
But if you have a solid belief, it's an "awareness". And you admit you latch onto things that only confirm your belief.

I actually do a lot of yoga, and I read and study the Tao. Neither makes me believe in magic. NDE's are still explained through natural experiences, as is the feeling that God is within.  But you go ahead with your admitted confirmation bias.  I'll go ahead with my truly open mind.

[Edwardo Piet]

Aroura is smart.

Little Rik is an idiot.

This third sentence is also true.

This fourth paragraph is also true.

The above two paragraphs and sentences were silly. As is this one. Apart from this following part of this one: The first two sentences/paragraphs were non-silly truisms.

[Valyza1]

Engaging in healthy, communal, educational debate is great, as long as in the final analysis, there's a mutual respectfulness exhibited by both debaters.  That's great to see on the forums.  But when people argue with the mentality that the other side is deficient for being on the other side, I find that anti-productive and futile.  

Personally, I tend to think that converts on either side just never examined their initial position thoroughly enough to identify what they really believe.  In such a case, examination is helpful as long as, again, it's honest examination.  I don't see how that's possible when one's guard is up.  Ridicule and condescension are not conducive to self-examination, IMO.

I see your point, but still. It depends. And it can be a great backfire. I remember I first started really questioning my own views on religion after I'd rudely dismissed a classmate's belief in the abilities of 'psychic investigators' as unfounded nonsense and ridiculed her for believing in something without having any evidence to point anyone towards to. No more than three seconds later a little voice in my head went: "Yeah, kind of like your belief in Christianity."
But as a rule of thumb, I tend to agree. While I find the ideas behind religion ridiculous and utterly ridicule-worthy nowadays, when my conversational partner is polite I will reply in kind. Otherwise a decent conversation often seems impossible. It's only when one starts being demeaning to me that I tend to return the favor.
That all being said; I do don't really agree that converts on either side never examined their initial position thoroughly enough. Sometimes you can just have a gestaltswitch, sometimes just like that, sometimes brought on by grain by grain of argument until the weight of the final straw breaks the camel's back. Couple that with other attributes such as ego and stubborness which may cloud your objective ideas with subjective counterarguments. In that case, you've still concidered your arguments thoroughly, you just blocked them off internally for bad reasons.

These are some good points. The stoics say that blaming others for one's difficulties is the hallmark of the uneducated, blaming oneself is the hallmark of one who has begun education and blaming no one is the mark of the fully educated. It sounds like most of the conversions we're discussing arise from the quest to figure out where exactly to place blame, not necessarily on people, but on ideas. Either the opposing side has the right idea or I have the right idea, but one of us is right and the other is wrong. There either is a God, or there isn't. But the problem with the existence of God, as opposed to most other beliefs, is that the only common definition of God amongst theists is so general, that it's essentially a non-falsifiable concept, and one which which holds immeasurable value. Most non-falsifiable beliefs don't hold that kind of value for it's adherents. No one measures their entire life by the belief that Elvis is still alive or that Bigfoot exists. There is practically no point in ascertaining the truth value of the proposition itself, though there may be a point to ascertaining the truth value of some concrete co-beliefs that go along with certain religious views. But upon disproving such beliefs, the theist simply adjusts what they believe about the existing God, not the basic, non-falsifiable premise that God exists to begin with. So to expect that argumentation is going to affect someone's core beliefs past a certain level is, I think, misguided.

I, again speaking from my own experiences, had a hard time admitting I'd been wrong my entire life plus that I wasn't 'special', two things that really wreaked havoc on my bloated sense of self-importance. If I were ever to make the switch again, I imagine I'd find myself again hard-pressed to accept that I was wrong about this thing I only 'till recently described as ridiculous.

I would hope that you would only make a switch again if it no longer had to do with correctness, but rather with personal choice. Objectively speaking, God's existence or lack there of doesn't depend on what we believe. Our world view does.

[The Grand Nudger]

Believers having the right or wrong ideas doesn't depend on whether or not god exists either, in my opinion.  Right idea or wrong idea to kill the witches? k (hold that thought...).

Right idea if it's gods idea?

I criticize believers ideas if/when/because they have shitty ideas regardless of whether or not their god exists. Those ideas need to go the way of the dodo. Can't hit the actual people in the heads with a club...and it's obvious that people can continue to be a believer without requiring all those shitty ideas. I ridicule those ideas where the decency of criticism is not warranted. If a person tells me that fairies hate gays, so we need anti-gay laws...I'm not going to dignify that shit with a debate, but I won't just shut my mouth and let them shit in everyone's cereal.

[Valyza1]

Believers having the right or wrong ideas doesn't depend on whether or not god exists either, in my opinion.  Right idea or wrong idea to kill the witches? k (hold that thought...).

Right idea if it's gods idea?

I criticize believers ideas if/when/because they have shitty ideas regardless of whether or not their god exists. Those ideas need to go the way of the dodo. Can't hit the actual people in the heads with a club...and it's obvious that people can continue to be a believer without requiring all those shitty ideas. I ridicule those ideas where the decency of criticism is not warranted. If a person tells me that fairies hate gays, so we need anti-gay laws...I'm not going to dignify that shit with a debate, but I won't just shut my mouth and let them shit in everyone's cereal.

How does ridicule help reduce the enactment of biblically-inspired anti-gay laws?

[Aroura]

Believers having the right or wrong ideas doesn't depend on whether or not god exists either, in my opinion.  Right idea or wrong idea to kill the witches? k (hold that thought...).

Right idea if it's gods idea?

I criticize believers ideas if/when/because they have shitty ideas regardless of whether or not their god exists. Those ideas need to go the way of the dodo. Can't hit the actual people in the heads with a club...and it's obvious that people can continue to be a believer without requiring all those shitty ideas. I ridicule those ideas where the decency of criticism is not warranted. If a person tells me that fairies hate gays, so we need anti-gay laws...I'm not going to dignify that shit with a debate, but I won't just shut my mouth and let them shit in everyone's cereal.

How does ridicule help reduce the enactment of biblically-inspired anti-gay laws?

Although I personally agree that ridicule is not the way to go, studies show reasoned argument fares similarly if you are somply looking for results.
Getting people to change foundational ideas, or even accept new ideas that challenge their foundational ideas, is difficult. It seems that it is something we learn to do young, or perhaps never learn to do at all. How many people have ever deconverted after watching a reasoned debate in which their side was roundly trounced? How many will insist thair guy won no matter what?

Personally, mild ridicule helped me see the error of some of my ways of thinking. Harsh ridicule usually does more harm than good, but it's difficult to avoid when you've heard the same "argument" dozens of times, and it amounts to "feels!", or "but beauty!", etc.

However, I do agree with you that it should be avoided, if possible.

[The Grand Nudger]

Believers having the right or wrong ideas doesn't depend on whether or not god exists either, in my opinion.  Right idea or wrong idea to kill the witches? k (hold that thought...).

Right idea if it's gods idea?

I criticize believers ideas if/when/because they have shitty ideas regardless of whether or not their god exists.  Those ideas need to go the way of the dodo.  Can't hit the actual people in the heads with a club...and it's obvious that people can continue to be a believer without requiring all those shitty ideas.  I ridicule those ideas where the decency of criticism is not warranted.  If a person tells me that fairies hate gays, so we need anti-gay laws...I'm not going to dignify that shit with a debate, but I won't just shut my mouth and let them shit in everyone's cereal.

How does ridicule help reduce the enactment of biblically-inspired anti-gay laws?

In the same way that ridicule has -always- helped the cause o reducing the prevalence of it's focus.   Do you think that you, for example...rationally appraised the case for fairies when you were eight years old.....or did ridicule assure you that any association with fairies was unwise?

We've got believers on here, for example...that as soon as you call their god a fairy start huffing and puffing...because they don't believe in fairies........

So, ofc, I call their gods fairies any chance I get.

A person who cannot (for whatever reason) see reason..can very often recognise the applicability of ridicule.

[Amarok]

How does ridicule help reduce the enactment of biblically-inspired anti-gay laws?

Same as it helped take down slavers racists and other assorted scum . These idea's are deserving of shame . And shamed they will be .

[Valyza1]

How does ridicule help reduce the enactment of biblically-inspired anti-gay laws?

In the same way that ridicule has -always- helped the cause o reducing the prevalence of it's focus.   Do you think that you, for example...rationally appraised the case for fairies when you were eight years old.....or did ridicule assure you that any association with fairies was unwise?

Well, I'm not sure that's an apt example, as I was never told fairies were real. I was told, however, or at least hinted at, as a kid, that Superman's home planet Krypton was real, and that if I went there I could get super powers like him. The idea was never ridiculed, though. I just grew up and naturally learned more about the nature of space travel and the nature of fiction. And that's pretty much the process for every idea that I outgrew. There was never a point where I felt that being ridiculed helped me on my path to learning more about the world, other than learning that some people are dicks.

We've got believers on here, for example...that as soon as you call their god a fairy start huffing and puffing...because they don't believe in fairies........

So, ofc, I call their gods fairies any chance I get.

A person who cannot (for whatever reason) see reason..can very often recognise the applicability of ridicule.

What do you mean by "cannot see reason"? Do you mean they only respond to emotional stimulus? What is this "applicability of ridicule" you're speaking of? Silencing people from saying irrational things? Is a person who avoids passing a law they believe in just to avoid ridicule really the kind of person you want in congress?

[Anon2381]

How do theists justify the fact that people have different experiences, not under their own control in anyone's definition of free-will, and maintain that God is Just.

BECAUSE FREE WILL IS NEVER MENTIONED IN THE BIBLE!!!! IT IS A GREEK CONSTRUCT LATER ADDED TO "CHURCH DOCRTINE!"

Let's play pretend.  Sure let's pretend you know the difference between the Christianity set up in the bible and the one set up by men via things like 'church doctrine.' Let us also assume that you understand that church doctrine is often rife with contradictions, such as free will. But if you take what God actually says over that of what man says God said.. you get a completely different understanding of Christianity...

Let's play pretend you understand this but are going to ask your rehashed respun atheist standard question anyway.

Little Bobby is born in a nice western country.  

I think Chad or"zander" would be a better "white name."

He is never hungry, goes to nice schools, and is taught about the glory of God and Jesus.  He marries and has a wonderful, healthy family.  12 grandkids, all joyful.
He has some minor illnesses, but nothing major until whatever ends his wonderfully full life at age 89.

Little Jamal

Great name choice draws a very distinct picture.

is born in a developing nation to a poor family, he is born with a major disability.  He is often hungry, but his family scrapes by.  His only education is in a hut by a foreign priest.  He's lucky to have it at all.

Quick question what of those born here in that same situation? Does geography really become that final straw for you?

He also is taught about the glory of Jesus and God his entire life.  He goes to church, and is model. He volunteers in his community, shares what little food he has, etc.  He maries, has kids, and then his wife is raped and murdered and his children die of starvation in a war dropped on his country that he absolutely nothing to do with, when he was just trying to live well and get by.
He loses his faith, and dies in a ditch at age 45.

@ 45 and in such harsh conditions this brother should have well more than simple faith between Himself and God. Not to say the test of loosing everything is not a test between you and God. It was the central test between Job and God. Meaning I think in this situation the man who has lived the harder life may be far more developed spiritually that the douche in america.

But let's just say he did and lost his will to serve God.. then died. Is it in your mind such a person is going to hell? So then what was this man's sin? was it to blaspheme the Holy Spirit? No not according to your narrative. As He life 45 years in communion with God. So then why would this sin not be forgiven like anyother? Not to say Christ could simply not forgive him because he was never chosen, but if he were then again why would their be any forgiveness for this man?

Now, let's even pretend that all of life is a test, and God will give every person a chance, after death, to recognize his glory and accept him.  So even nonbelievers, fallen away believers, people of other faiths, etc, all get this sort of second chance to make this supposed choice.

This life is a test, so that we may know and be assured that if we wind up in Hell it is because our nature demands it. or vise versa. Our judgement is not so much about what we will or will not do. as God already knows the answer to it if and when given the chance. Christ will judge if you have or have not been given the chance and then what you decided or would have decided. Because at that point it will have already been done.

If Jamal is so angry and upset by the fact that God allowed his family to suffer that he disavows God even after meeting him after death, but Bobby gets a straight ticket to heaven because he never had a reason to doubt OR to be upset at God, how is that anything remotely JUST?

Maybe just maybe Jamal loved his family more than God. Or even deeper, the soul who would become Jamal would always love his family MORE than God, And God knew this. So He placed the soul that would become Jamal in a situation that showed the soul why He could never be content in an eternity with God. So that when Jamal went to Hell Jamal knew that God was right and can find peace with the idea that he could never love God, as God has asked us to love Him, in the only two commands we actually have. (Love God with all of our being and love our neighbors as ourselves.) The whole rest of the law is satisfied if we can simply follow those two commands.


Then maybe Bobby's soul is exactly what God is looking for minus a few instances of sin. So he gets the easier life...

Or maybe Jamal Spirit wanted to be tested and be in a position to receive a higher reward, was tested and failed several times. Is failing God's test a sin? Not one that's can't be forgiven. If Jamal went in a believer there is still hope. it just depends on where his heart i in this matter.

---

In the church where Jamal goes to, he is the model and well liked by all, I suppose.
This guy has enough food that he can afford to share some.
A woman, who he knew well, was raped and not only that, she was then murdered.
Some children that he also knew very well, actually starved to death.
Why does this guy get all the breaks, what the fuck is god thinking, it's so unfair.

I think this is a shithouse atheist argument.
It's like, 'If your god was real, then why isn't everybody exactly the same as each other?'

Actually if your God is real why don't we all live in heaven?

WTF ? Bobby's soul is exactly what god is looking for?  God knew Jamel couldn't be content with eternity in heaven?
And you say God put these souls in these boys knowing the choices they'd make. Well how about this analogy of your freewill idea:
God holds a gun to your head (pretend god is more compassionate than his eternity in hell plan).
God says " You are my beautiful child made in my image please come with me to paradise forever!" "Be my beautiful bride
or if you don't I will blow your brains out."  
So this is what your god is offering. As an adult I can see how screwed up that is. 
I was a born-again christian for many years with the one goal to be a pastors wife. My aunt had a dream when I was 14 that I married a dark haired pastor. My parents had me meet with our pastors wife and because I give a shit about people I was sold on the idea. I had this personal relationship with Jesus you christians talk about. All wrapped up with speaking in tongues, and being slain in the spirit yada yada yada. Well its all a load of crap. Also a huge waste of time and thoughts. Im fine with people that want to believe in this god of the Bible if it makes them more at peace with death.  But I have a problem with Christians who think they can explain how their insane god picks and chooses people heaven and hell. It just proves your god is not worthy of love.