Theists: how do you account for psychopaths?

[The Grand Nudger]

It would be alot easier to just say that god cant do that..and it breaks gods heart to watch it go down.  It wouldn;t be the first time he screwed the pooch and did something regretable...but he learned his lesson the last time he tried to commit xenocide.  

Perhaps he notes that everything he sticks his hands into goes completely entirely and immediately to shit?  The religions of the world being a case example.

Poor thing just can;t get it right..but, look..it's hard...and I understand that.

[Catholic_Lady]

If there is indeed a God out there, it would be a little unreasonable for me to assume I know what's best better than He does.

[Silver]

And that sort of gullibility is what leads to the reverence of monsters.

[Catholic_Lady]

As I said. I assume one day each one of us will understand.

That just seems like a way to stop thinking about it and switch your brain off, to me.



Again, there's literally no possible moral justification for allowing needless suffering when you're an omnipotent being that doesn't need it.

But it's okay. You're a theist. So when you run out of answers it's expected you'll choose a "one day we'll know, I guess." response over a giving up on your beliefs response.

Meh, atheists have plenty of unanswered questions too.

And I never said to stop thinking about it. I think about it on a daily basis actually. It's not like I don't have my own set of suffering that I wish would just miraculously be fixed.

---

And that sort of gullibility is what leads to the reverence of monsters.

What are you referring to exactly?

[Edwardo Piet]

If there is indeed a God out there, it would be a little unreasonable for me to assume I know what's best better than He does.

Not when the alternative is logically impossible and he cannot do the logically impossible.

---

Meh, atheists have plenty of unanswered questions too.

But atheism isn't a belief in the truth of an unanswered question. People have many unanswered questions, but to believe for a logical reason is one thing and to believe on faith despite no logical reason supporting it is another.

And I never said to stop thinking about it.

And I never said you stopped thinking about it, either. I said that when you fall back to that "One day we will find out, I guess" attitude you've temporarily stopped thinking about it.

I think about it on a daily basis actually.

I'm sure you do. But wondering why God allows it is different when you assume he must have a good reason despite all the reasons to the contrary. Do you ever doubt your faith in God, do you ever doubt his existence, do you ever doubt the fact that a being that doesn't need to allow needless suffering allows it anyway speaks to the possibility of his absurdity?

If you ever do doubt God or have a loss of faith do you feel guilty and blasphemous and does that bolster your belief in him... when if you didn't feel that way maybe you'd have more of an open mind to the truth however unready you are for it?

[Catholic_Lady]

No, I don't feel guilty for the fleeting moments of doubt. I see them as being normal and healthy even.

Wondering why exactly God allows these things, but trusting that He must have a good reason, aren't mutually exclussive.

[Amarok]

Wondering why exactly God allows these things, but trusting that He must have a good reason, aren't mutually exclussive.

Yes they very much are

---

If there is indeed a God out there, it would be a little unreasonable for me to assume I know what's best better than He does.

Yes it unreasonable

[Edwardo Piet]

Wondering why exactly God allows these things, but trusting that He must have a good reason, aren't mutually exclussive.

What I mean is... you start from the presupposition that he both exists and must have a good reason for allowing it.

I think the problem is that he cannot do the logically impossible... so if you find a contradiction then you certainly can rationally say that you know better than he does. He can't defeat logic.

So, like I said, seen as he can do anything that is logically possible there is literally no need for him to allow needless suffering. He can achieve whatever end net good he wants without any of the bad. You say there must be a reason but I'm saying that there can't possibly be because he is supposedly choosing the greatest option but there's a greater option that is logically possible and that he can therefore achieve which he hasn't chosen because suffering happens.

P1: God always chooses the best logically possible option.
P2. There is a better logically possible option than the one in which God has chosen which he hasn't chosen.
C: Therefore such a God does not exist.

[Amarok]

Meh, atheists have plenty of unanswered questions too.

1. Atheism isn't an ideology thus why would it answer questions ?

2. Tu quoque fallacy

[robvalue]

The odd thing is that I’m not even going to see any of heavenly rewards which supposedly make sense of this life which I hate. So I must be some sort of collateral damage for other peoples’ payoffs. Fantastic.