Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: July 25, 2026, 9:06 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
#11
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
A god that wants to test us is bound to try and justify it by making us seemingly get stronger after testing.

Since he apparently did the design, he could just make us fit and capable to do whatever we want and be happy all the time without all this jerking around.

He's either really rubbish, or he's using us for cheap laughs.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
#12
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
(May 15, 2015 at 4:20 pm)Hatshepsut Wrote: Okay. This one's now different, about the basics of what we should show before we can take omnibenevolence seriously. None of the three kinds of world, perfect, best possible, or better than nothing, itself implies omnibenevolence is operant, only that it's still a contender in the ring. If Pyrrho is correct that we're in a "worse than nothing," then I'm lost. Maybe we would switch to "better than the worst possible world," as many worlds might be worse than none. Or even "the best of all worlds that are worse than nothing." Big Grin

However, replies to the other (now open) thread should go there & not here, I suppose.  FSM Grin

I find all talk of world-evaluation ridiculous. (Forgive me if I am repeating myself. Expect that to increase.)

You choose to emphasize "what we can show" (my bolding). I'm far more interested in what you can possibly know. The world we're in is the only one any of us have or ever will know. There is no actual basis for comparison. However the world may appear to someone, they are just telling you about their own state of happiness.

I understand why the point (nonsensical or not) is important to you, or at least doctrinal religionists. After all you're the ones who like to imagine that a god (some of) you imagine as omni-everything put it all together the same way a watchmaker assembles a time piece.

I don't understand why anyone without such a belief cares to get caught up in assigning a rating to 'the world' we live in, especially not when those ratings are couched in terms of "the best anyone can do". Newsflash, none of us is ever going to get a chance to construct their own better world. (Sorry Mormons.) I see no point in engaging in a critique of 'this particular world' -you know, out of all the ones there could be if they were being put together by clever assemblers like ourselves.

(May 16, 2015 at 10:24 am)robvalue Wrote: A god that wants to test us is bound to try and justify it by making us seemingly get stronger after testing.

Since he apparently did the design, he could just make us fit and capable to do whatever we want and be happy all the time without all this jerking around.

He's either really rubbish, or he's using us for cheap laughs.


That is because god wants us to have free will so we can choose to slit our wrists instead of rising to His challenges.  Didn't you get the memo? 

(May 16, 2015 at 10:06 am)Hatshepsut Wrote: Because I'm not an authority on God, I don't know whether deity tests people or not. In some theologies, it does, in others, it refrains.

And in others theologies deity has no idea or interest that we're here at all. I prefer to liken the creation act to taking a dump. If deities there must be (gag), perhaps galaxies are their excrement. An unintended byproduct of what ever sustains them. Personally I don't choose my meals with the intention of creating good worlds for the tiny life which will make it their world.
Reply
#13
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
(May 16, 2015 at 11:00 am)whateverist Wrote: ...

(May 16, 2015 at 10:24 am)robvalue Wrote: A god that wants to test us is bound to try and justify it by making us seemingly get stronger after testing.

Since he apparently did the design, he could just make us fit and capable to do whatever we want and be happy all the time without all this jerking around.

He's either really rubbish, or he's using us for cheap laughs.


That is because god wants us to have free will so we can choose to slit our wrists instead of rising to His challenges.  Didn't you get the memo? 
...

[Image: xfzx35F.jpg]

"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
Reply
#14
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
Why isn't there any free will in heaven?
Reply
#15
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
I suspect the answer to the OP is that it is the best we could do.
Reply
#16
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
(May 16, 2015 at 5:48 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Why isn't there any free will in heaven?

It's simple Chad if you ask god questions about the grand plan or just about him being not a nice guy he will go crazy and go off the deep end. 
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today. 


Code:
<iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&amp;auto_play=false&amp;hide_related=false&amp;show_comments=true&amp;show_user=true&amp;show_reposts=false&amp;visual=true"></iframe>
Reply
#17
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
(May 16, 2015 at 5:48 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Why isn't there any free will in heaven?

It is simple.

When people ask, why is there evil in the world?, many times, theists say it is because of free will (never mind the fact that free will does not explain earthquakes, diseases, etc., etc., etc.).  If free will causes evil, then either there is evil in heaven, or there is no free will in heaven.  If people have free will in heaven and there is no evil in heaven, then having free will does not explain evil here and now.  Basically, a lot of Christians have inconsistent gibberish that they believe, or they would not say the idiotic things they say.

So, why is there evil in the world, if there is a god who is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly benevolent?  Or do you deny that there is such a god?

"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
Reply
#18
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
I'm leaving the forum but wished to express thanks to everyone for the discussions. It was enjoyable. Smile
Reply
#19
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
(May 16, 2015 at 12:17 pm)Pyrrho Wrote:
(May 16, 2015 at 11:00 am)whateverist Wrote: ...



That is because god wants us to have free will so we can choose to slit our wrists instead of rising to His challenges.  Didn't you get the memo? 
...

[Image: xfzx35F.jpg]

Yes, there is free will in heaven.
No, there is no evil in heaven.


Is this a problem? Logically, if everyone in heaven has freely chosen to obey God, then there is no evil or sin. The stupidity of the above is found in the assumption that free will MUST result in evil. It doesn't.

Look at it this way: 

Do kids in a classroom have free will? Yes.
Can they choose to be disruptive when there is a substitute teacher? Yes.
Can they choose to be obedient instead? Yes.
Is there any problem in the classroom in that case? No.
Reply
#20
RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
Randy, do you not believe that some angels in heaven rebelled against god?
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  America's "best" Christian. Jackie 3 1603 June 12, 2024 at 11:00 pm
Last Post: awty
  Which version of xtianity is most likely to be correct? FrustratedFool 20 5800 December 8, 2023 at 10:21 am
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  What are the best arguments against Christian Science? FlatAssembler 8 2181 September 17, 2023 at 6:49 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  Hiistorical jesus my best guess. highdimensionman 13 3682 May 25, 2022 at 11:12 pm
Last Post: Neo-Scholastic
Thumbs Down The story of Noah' s Ark - or - God is dumber than you. onlinebiker 75 19327 September 24, 2021 at 5:53 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  which version of christianity is correct? Drich 86 25486 March 30, 2020 at 3:34 am
Last Post: Dundee
  [Serious] Trying close to my best to rationalize Christianity sausagerock 65 17099 January 29, 2020 at 4:47 pm
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  Best books debunking Christianity KiwiNFLFan 83 30736 January 16, 2020 at 10:21 am
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  In what way is the Resurrection the best explanation? GrandizerII 159 43425 November 25, 2019 at 6:46 am
Last Post: Abaddon_ire
  Saints With The Best Stories BrianSoddingBoru4 18 5425 November 15, 2019 at 4:48 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)