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: August 19, 2022, 1:04 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 23, 2022 at 3:16 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: His alleged divine justice system didn't prevent it either. tsk tsk tsk.  Who are you to question allahs plan?  Could the russians have invaded if it weren't the will of god that they did?

This can still be accounted for cogently in the free will framework, any russian soldier or decision-maker has free will, hence the agression. If God were to intervene to cancel even one person's free will, he would cancel free will altogether for all people, being just by defintiion.

(March 23, 2022 at 3:16 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: You're also still talking about free will, I'm still waiting to hear you explain how a person stopped from doing what they've freely willed to do is impossible, either for your god, or in mere reality.

Free will that has no real ramifications is not free will. If God were to intervene every evil act from happening, it's obvious that no one will make any effort to do anything. 

There is another thing that should be kept in mind withing the religious framework: that life and all the suffering it entails is a divine test.
Qur'anic revelation is the sole path to ultimate reality. All argumentation and philosophy is an expression of arrogance and an overestimation of human cognitive ability. 

"But believe me, Cleanthes, the most natural feeling that a well-disposed mind will have on this occasion is a longing desire and expectation that God will be pleased to remove or at least to lessen this profound ignorance, by giving mankind some particular revelation, revealing the nature, attributes, and operations of the divine object of our faith." (Hume's Dialogues)


Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
Pretty sure you just identified the flaw in your own argument. It’s not that you think free will would be impossible if you could be stopped. You argued facetiously to that effect from the first utterance.

You just think nothing would matter, in that case.

I disagree, and, obviously….the justice systems of developed nations disagree.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 23, 2022 at 6:10 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Pretty sure you just identified the flaw in your own argument.  It’s not that you think free will would be impossible if you could be stopped.  You argued facetiously to that effect from the first utterance.

You just think nothing would matter, in that case.  

I disagree, and, obviously….the justice systems of developed nations disagree.

It's enough that no atheist ever could prove that evil contradicts benevolence, we don't even need a theodicy of free will.
Qur'anic revelation is the sole path to ultimate reality. All argumentation and philosophy is an expression of arrogance and an overestimation of human cognitive ability. 

"But believe me, Cleanthes, the most natural feeling that a well-disposed mind will have on this occasion is a longing desire and expectation that God will be pleased to remove or at least to lessen this profound ignorance, by giving mankind some particular revelation, revealing the nature, attributes, and operations of the divine object of our faith." (Hume's Dialogues)


Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 23, 2022 at 6:47 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: It's enough that no atheist ever could prove that evil contradicts benevolence, we don't even need a theodicy of free will.

A God that allows evil cannot be both benevolent and omnipotent.  It either doesn't care, or can't do anything.

The "evil works for good" argument makes no sense, because surely "good works for good" would be better. 

The idea that evil is "necessary" because a God needs to let people do evil so they won't feel over-parented, is just inane.

And I categorically reject "evil doesn't matter, because this life doesn't matter - only the afterlife matters".
Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 23, 2022 at 3:19 am)Deesse23 Wrote:
(March 22, 2022 at 9:23 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote: Take the case of Armenia vs Azerbaijan in Sep 2020. Azerbaijan continually attacks the Artsakh-Kharabagh region and is trying to take it back.
What the news outlets don’t tell you:
According to the UN, Artsakh-Kharabagh belongs to Azerbaijan.
According to who? Soviet Russia, I think it was during Stalin’s time, gave some Armenia’s land to Azerbaijan, some to Georgia.
Why does the UN respect that decision?
There are ancient maps that show those regions were part of Armenia.

That issue started with the breakup of the Soviet union in 1991. How is it that the UN is backing Azerbaijan? Is it because of the petrol fields? Armenia has none and Azerbaijan has plenty.

CONCLUSION: At the international level, at the presidential level, politics gets dirty and news media tend to misrepresent or choose what to present and what not to present to people.
You dont seem to know the basics of international law. That does not make this a conspiracy, it just shows your ignorance.
There is an antidote to this (ignorance)

These are man made laws and they are made by people who make laws that tend to benefit themselves or causes as little trouble to themselves as possible or they are designed to not upset their allies.
Such laws do not negatively impact the countries that establish those laws. It only negatively impacts foreign countries.

So the question remains. Why do the borders as setup by Soviet Russia get respected by the UN?

(March 23, 2022 at 8:56 am)Deesse23 Wrote:
(March 23, 2022 at 7:02 am)Jehanne Wrote: How many times has Russia been invaded over the last 300 years?  Recall the presence of US troops in Russia a century ago:

The Forgotten Story of the American Troops Who Got Caught Up in the Russian Civil War

...and that is a justification of what?
Russia (and its allies) has attacked the Ottoman Empire in the past 300 years numerous times, conquering Ukraine, Crimera, et al.

What’s wrong with attacking the Ottoman Empire?
It’s been well established that turks are invaders in Asia Minor. There were already well established nations on those lands and the turks invaded, killed off people and took over.

According to local rules, I am not allowed to kill my neighbor and take his house and other belongings. Why is it that on the international level, this is acceptable?

(March 23, 2022 at 6:54 am)Nomad Wrote:
(March 22, 2022 at 9:23 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote: Take the case of Ukraine vs Russia. Every news channel tells us how evil and mad Putin is. What they don’t tell us is that there was peace just a few years ago. The problem was initiated by an anti-russian policy from Ukraine in ~Jan 2014 and later on, they tried to join NATO.
It is part of USA foreign policy to get every ex-Soviet nation to join it and to isolate Russia.
What’s the purpose of NATO? The Russians probably see it as an organization that wants to setup an army to invade Russia.
Every single bit of the bolded part is a lie.

Alright. What is your version of the truth?

The information I posted comes from this
Why is Ukraine the West's Fault? Featuring John Mearsheimer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
By The University of Chicago
Length = 1:14:15
Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 23, 2022 at 3:55 pm)Jehanne Wrote:
(March 23, 2022 at 2:49 pm)Deesse23 Wrote: And this has ab.so.fucking.lutely nothing to do with Kennedy, Cuba, Nato or Hamilcar Barca for that matter.

Just so that we are clear, I do not agree with what Putin is doing in the Ukraine, nor do I agree with Kennedy's escalations during the Cuban missile crisis, nor do I agree with the Reagan administration's involvement in Nicaragua, nor Turkey's conflict with Armenia; my list goes on and on.  (I also believe that the United States should have allowed the Confederacy to secede, but, that's for another thread.)

Then why did you mention how Russia was invaded in the past 300 years? Why mention how a few American troops were in Russia a hundred years ago, in a conversation about the russian invasion of Ukraine. Why did you mention the Cuba crisis when i challenged you for (alleged) russian invasion apologetics? Why defending a position you now claim do dont hold?

What was your original point in posting this?  Huh

(March 23, 2022 at 10:05 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote:
(March 23, 2022 at 8:56 am)Deesse23 Wrote: ...and that is a justification of what?
Russia (and its allies) has attacked the Ottoman Empire in the past 300 years numerous times, conquering Ukraine, Crimera, et al.

What’s wrong with attacking the Ottoman Empire?
It’s been well established that turks are invaders in Asia Minor. There were already well established nations on those lands and the turks invaded, killed off people and took over.
Whats wrong with attacking Russia?
It’s been well established that Russians are invaders in Ukraine and Crimea. There were already well established nations on those lands and the Russians invaded, killed off people and took over.

(March 23, 2022 at 10:05 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote: According to local rules, I am not allowed to kill my neighbor and take his house and other belongings. Why is it that on the international level, this is acceptable?
Please point out the article in the UN charter, the article which says that invasions of other nations are acceptable.
Cetero censeo religionem delendam esse
Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 24, 2022 at 3:11 am)Deesse23 Wrote:
(March 23, 2022 at 3:55 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Just so that we are clear, I do not agree with what Putin is doing in the Ukraine, nor do I agree with Kennedy's escalations during the Cuban missile crisis, nor do I agree with the Reagan administration's involvement in Nicaragua, nor Turkey's conflict with Armenia; my list goes on and on.  (I also believe that the United States should have allowed the Confederacy to secede, but, that's for another thread.)

Then why did you mention how Russia was invaded in the past 300 years? Why mention how a few American troops were in Russia a hundred years ago, in a conversation about the russian invasion of Ukraine. Why did you mention the Cuba crisis when i challenged you for (alleged) russian invasion apologetics? Why defending a position you now claim do dont hold?

What was your original point in posting this?  Huh


Pot (the West) meet Kettle (Russia)
And without delay Peter went quickly out of the synagogue (assembly) and went unto the house of Marcellus, where Simon lodged: and much people followed him...And Peter turned unto the people that followed him and said: Ye shall now see a great and marvellous wonder. And Peter seeing a great dog bound with a strong chain, went to him and loosed him, and when he was loosed the dog received a man's voice and said unto Peter: What dost thou bid me to do, thou servant of the unspeakable and living God? Peter said unto him: Go in and say unto Simon in the midst of his company: Peter saith unto thee, Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And immediately the dog ran and entered in, and rushed into the midst of them that were with Simon, and lifted up his forefeet and in a loud voice said: Thou Simon, Peter the servant of Christ who standeth at the door saith unto thee: Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou most wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And when Simon heard it, and beheld the incredible sight, he lost the words wherewith he was deceiving them that stood by, and all of them were amazed. (The Acts of Peter, 9)
Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 24, 2022 at 3:54 am)Jehanne Wrote:
(March 24, 2022 at 3:11 am)Deesse23 Wrote: Then why did you mention how Russia was invaded in the past 300 years? Why mention how a few American troops were in Russia a hundred years ago, in a conversation about the russian invasion of Ukraine. Why did you mention the Cuba crisis when i challenged you for (alleged) russian invasion apologetics? Why defending a position you now claim do dont hold?

What was your original point in posting this?  Huh


Pot (the West) meet Kettle (Russia)
Still, whatever "the west" did wrong, does not apologize a russian invasion of ....whatever.
At best it makes "the west" hypocrites".

At best, i would draw this comparison: Versailes treaty.

Germany lost lots of territory. The (2nd) empire ceased to exist and the 3rd* one tried to gain back those lost territories (and its status and reputation. The republic already did). Once can blame the allies for being too stupid to treat Germany properly in the treaty of versailles, and not forseeing potential consequences. Once can conclude that it was inevitable that Germany would try to get back its central and leading position in Europe.
Still, none of that excuses the rise of 3rd Reich did (and was), of what it was and did.

Putin is a tyrant, someone who poisons, imprisons, invades at will. Someone who abandoned free speech and free press. Putin is noones fault but his own, for being such a shitty human being. 


*the mere existence of the 3rd one can be attributed to this issue if you may
Cetero censeo religionem delendam esse
Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 23, 2022 at 6:47 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:
(March 23, 2022 at 6:10 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Pretty sure you just identified the flaw in your own argument.  It’s not that you think free will would be impossible if you could be stopped.  You argued facetiously to that effect from the first utterance.

You just think nothing would matter, in that case.  

I disagree, and, obviously….the justice systems of developed nations disagree.

It's enough that no atheist ever could prove that evil contradicts benevolence, we don't even need a theodicy of free will.

-and yet every religious nut..yourself included, deigns to come up with an inept one.

Ultimately, though, I wholeheartedly agree with you. There is no need for a theodicy of evil or a theodicy of free will. Gods do what they do, and don't do what they don't do, and fuck you is why. You either can do what you freely will or can only do what god wills..because fuck you is why. Theodicies of evil and free will are only necessary with respect to some peoples beliefs about gods, beliefs like yours, the truth of which are irrelevant to the existence of gods.

Which is great for gods, since you nuts are dull. Wouldn't want their existence hinging on some shit you believe, now would they?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
(March 24, 2022 at 3:11 am)Deesse23 Wrote:
(March 23, 2022 at 10:05 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote: What’s wrong with attacking the Ottoman Empire?
It’s been well established that turks are invaders in Asia Minor. There were already well established nations on those lands and the turks invaded, killed off people and took over.
Whats wrong with attacking Russia?
It’s been well established that Russians are invaders in Ukraine and Crimea. There were already well established nations on those lands and the Russians invaded, killed off people and took over.

I am not claiming that it is ok for Russia to invade Ukraine. Europe + Russia went through 2 disastrous wars not long ago (WW1 and WW2). They shouldn’t even do small wars.
What I am saying is that these events are connected with the USA foreign policy of treating Russia as an enemy.
The USA’s plan is to establish military bases wherever they can, all over the globe.
Part of their plan involves bringing in ex-Soviet nations into the sphere of influence of the USA, establish military bases and have nuclear weapons ready.
The only nation that the USA does not want is Russia.
Which other nation sets up military bases everywhere?

So, how does Russia view these actions? It is natural for them to think that it is time to stop the USA.

The war between Ukraine and Russia is more of a war between the USA and Russia. It is similar to the war between Georgia and Russia just a few years before.


Quote:Please point out the article in the UN charter, the article which says that invasions of other nations are acceptable.

It is suppose to be unacceptable yet, there is Turkey that has taken Armenian, Assyrian, Greek lands. There is Turkey that has invaded Cyprus in 1974. There is China that invaded Tibet. Currently, China has sent there military near the border of India and there is some small skirmish. Russia has taken some islands that belong to Japan since WW2 and has not returned it yet.

During the Iraq war of 2001 and +, they kept telling us on the news what a jerk Sadam is and how he used toxic gas on kurds.
Why are they telling us this while they are reporting on the USA invading Iraq?
What about the Tutsi vs the Hutu? Why didn’t the USA send troops there.
What about the genocide in Darfour?

Like I said, at the topmost level and at the international level, committing crimes and getting away with it is the norm.
No country wants to send there soldiers and risk their lives to save some other people. They only do it if there is profits to be made.

There is the Bosnian thing. I’m not sure what the deal with that was. Apparently, the USA and a few countries did send soldiers to stop it.
Apparently, the international court dealt with Slobodan Milovich.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  My Almighty VS your argument against it Won2blv 43 1433 May 5, 2022 at 9:13 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Atheism and the existence of peanut butter Klorophyll 710 26500 April 6, 2022 at 8:57 am
Last Post: Helios
  What is the best counter argument against "What do you lose by believing?" Macoleco 25 1139 May 1, 2021 at 8:05 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  How may one refute the religious stonewall argument "all is one"? Osopatata 29 1690 December 21, 2020 at 4:05 pm
Last Post: HappySkeptic
  Arguments against Soul FlatAssembler 327 13274 February 20, 2020 at 11:28 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  The Argument Against Evil-lution no one 19 1940 January 5, 2020 at 7:58 am
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  How to easily defeat any argument for God Tom Fearnley 629 13393 November 22, 2019 at 9:27 pm
Last Post: Tom Fearnley
  Arguments Against Creator God GrandizerII 77 15574 November 16, 2019 at 9:38 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
Information The Best Logique Evidence of God Existence Nogba 225 14197 August 2, 2019 at 11:44 am
Last Post: comet
  Atheists being asked about the existence of Jesus Der/die AtheistIn 154 10619 January 24, 2019 at 1:30 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)