RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 21, 2012 at 11:12 pm
(This post was last modified: July 21, 2012 at 11:14 pm by Skepsis.)
(July 21, 2012 at 6:18 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: As I already said, the two are linked. Without suffering there cannot be love. Without death there cannot be life. Without disasters there would not be life on earth. I've presented my case. You're dismissing mine without reason.I haven't dismissed yours or I would have stopped talking to you.
Suffering and love aren't necessarily linked. A creator God with the capacity to create anything could potentially create... anything. Therefore, if there is possibly a world where there doesn't exist suffering but includes love, God failed to create that would and is thus morally unjustified to do so.
(July 21, 2012 at 6:18 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: And that is a logically bankrupt statement for the reasons already offered.
Whatever you say, Fr0d0.
I'm not here to help justify your God. I don't have to prove any one universe is compatible with your deity.
(July 21, 2012 at 6:18 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: The infinite love of god is towards us, is what you're addressing if you're addressing my God. You seem to be mis-applying the attribute. God's creation is this reality. That includes all the suffering and death. This god you address is a straw man of your own creation, and doesn't resemble mine.If I am misaddressing your God, just tell me. Tell me what you mean when you say "God". I understand Christianity and religion as a whole is little more than a trip through the cafeteria, picking and choosing what you want. I should have known better than to assume you meant the traditional Christian God that has all his omnis attached.
However, despite the fact I have no clue what you were trying to say in that last rebutall, I don't see how you got past my objection than an all-loving God wouldn't have created a place of suffering in the first place.
Edit: You believe in a literal hell, do you not? That would be even stronger, though you would have to ignore all those verses abot a lake of fire and that stuff about fire and brimstone. But then again, Christians don't usually have much of a problem discarding the verses they don't like.
(July 21, 2012 at 6:18 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I've justified it many times. God is the potential that is the creation. The positive force as it had to be to create. Evil is the opposing force that would resist God. A malevolent God, in this construct, is an impossibility. This would have to be a lesser entity, as a destructive force couldn't have created anything. It needs something already created so that it has something to destroy.
God creates and evil destroys? Why can't evil build, if not only to watch its creation crumble?
What of the death star?
No, I sincerely disagree that evil is incapable of creation. Evil people are capable, so why not an evil God?
It looks to me you are hitting a mental block that you expect me to see clearly, but instead my reasoning is unclouded and I see no such block.
Or maybe you are just terrible at putting your thoughts into words. Either way, you know?
My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true.
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell