(July 27, 2015 at 1:38 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: "The suffering in the world is not evidence against a god, but it is evidence against a powerful being with our best interests at heart."
I go back to moral authority here. When you say there is evil, you must assume there is good. But if there is good and evil there must be a Moral Law to differentiate between the two. If there is a moral law there must be a moral law giver. But if there is no moral law giver (no God), there is no moral law, if there is no moral law, there is no good, if there is no good there is no evil.
Because you see such a thing as suffering and evil there must also be love, compassion and goodness. If a powerful being created a world where there can be no evil and suffering (and also no love, goodness), would that not be equivalent to a world of automatons? A world where we could only follow what was allowed and have no freedom to choose? But you ask why would a God create a world where his creation could disobey his rules and reject and hate Him?
Why do people have children? Do we not also run the risk of those children rejecting us and disobeying us? We certainly run the risk, but still feel they are worth creating.
So, you don't believe in heaven, if you keep your story consistent.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
