Special Pleading and the PoE (Part 2)

[Trailblazer]

And let me guess: the scripture can't be a lie because you know God is benevolent.
And you know God is benevolent because the scripture says he is.
And you know that the scripture can't be a lie because you know God is benevolent.
And you know God is benevolent because the scripture says he is.
And you know that the scripture can't be a lie because you know God is benevolent.

And let me guess: the scripture can't be a lie because you know God is benevolent. (not my position)
And you know God is benevolent because the scripture says he is. (my position)
And you know that the scripture can't be a lie because you know God is benevolent. (not my position)
And you know God is benevolent because the scripture says he is.(my position)
And you know that the scripture can't be a lie because you know God is benevolent (not my position)

I know that God is benevolent because the scripture says He is benevolent.
I know that scripture cannot be a lie because God does not send Messengers who lie.

Bible Verses about God's Benevolence

• Exodus 20:6
  but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.
  
• Matthew 5:45
  that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
  
• James 1:17
  Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.
  
• Exodus 34:5-7
  Now the LORD descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. And the LORD passed before him and proclaimed, "The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children's children to the third and the fourth generation."
  
• John 3:16
  For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
  
• Romans 5:6-9
  For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.
  
• Ephesians 2:8
  For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
  
• James 4:6
  But He gives more grace. Therefore He says:
  " God resists the proud,
  But gives grace to the humble."
  
• Exodus 20:2
  "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
  
• Deuteronomy 7:7-9
  The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the LORD loves you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore to your fathers, the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you from the house of bondage, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. "Therefore know that the LORD your God, He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy for a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His commandments;
  
• Deuteronomy 32:4
  He is the Rock, His work is perfect;
  For all His ways are justice,
  A God of truth and without injustice;
  Righteous and upright is He.
  
• Job 2:10
  But he said to her, 'You speak as one of the foolish women speaks. Shall we indeed accept good from God, and shall we not accept adversity?' In all this Job did not sin with his lips.
  
• Psalm 31:19
  Oh, how great is Your goodness,
  Which You have laid up for those who fear You,
  Which You have prepared for those who trust in You
  In the presence of the sons of men!
  
• Psalm 104:24
  O LORD, how manifold are Your works!
  In wisdom You have made them all.
  The earth is full of Your possessions—
  
• Psalm 139:14
  I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
  Marvelous are Your works,
  And that my soul knows very well.
  
• Jeremiah 33:6
  Behold, I will bring it health and healing; I will heal them and reveal to them the abundance of peace and truth.
  
• Jeremiah 33:9
  Then it shall be to Me a name of joy, a praise, and an honor before all nations of the earth, who shall hear all the good that I do to them; they shall fear and tremble for all the goodness and all the prosperity that I provide for it.’
  
• Lamentations 3:22-23
  Through the LORD’s mercies we are not consumed,
  Because His compassions fail not.
  They are new every morning;
  Great is Your faithfulness.
  
• Hosea 3:5
  Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They shall fear the LORD and His goodness in the latter days.
  
• Malachi 3:6
  "For I am the LORD, I do not change;
  Therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob.
  
• Matthew 7:11
  If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!
  
• John 1:14
  And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
  
• John 1:16-17
  And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace. For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
  
• Acts 14:17
  Nevertheless He did not leave Himself without witness, in that He did good, gave us rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.'
  
• Romans 2:4
  Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?
  
• Romans 8:28
  And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.
  
• Romans 11:22
  Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.
  
• 1 Corinthians 10:13
  No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.
  
• 1 John 3:16
  By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us. And we also ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

Bible Verses about God's Benevolence

 

[F1fan]

God has a mind and a will as humans do but God is not a human so His mind and will are not the same as a human mind and will. There is some truth to what you are saying because God and His creation have always existed.

Interesting. So where is God's brain. If it has a mind it must have a brain somewhere. Where is it?

However, earth is only a very small part of God’s creation and earth has not always existed. Logically speaking, God had to set things in motion or they would never have come into existence at all. The Mind of God willed them to exist and they came into existence.

It sounds so simple, which is what dogma does.

Do you have any facts?

That would only be true if God wrote our story and determined our fate, but such is not the case. We determine our own fate by the choices me make and the actions we take. Some of our fate is outside of our control and that is the fate that is determined by God and His irrevocable decree.

Well, unfortunately if you get cancer you have no choice but to deal with what God created. That's fate. Or your version of God doesn't exist.

I do not want God to be anything. God is what God is.

Can you prove it isn't imaginary?

God is not accountable to humans for anything He does, it is humans who are accountable to God. God does intervene when He sends Messengers and that is the way God intervenes and helps people. God does not “come on down” to help people in need because God is not Superman. God is Spirit and remains forever in His own high place in Heaven.

Prove it.

Nothing God ever does can make Him immoral because only humans are subject to morality. God sets the standards for human morality, God does not have to follow them.

Why, because you say so?

If God sets the standards for morality not only should we NEVER try to cure cancer, why should try to cause it an any opportunity. Your God's morality is terrible. I suggest it's worse than Hitler.

God can never be malevolent because benevolence is an immutable attribute of God.

According to your dogma, not according to facts.

You can throw out anything you want. Do you think I care? You can continue to believe in your imaginary god who is malevolent but I prefer to believe in the real God who is benevolent.

You bet. I'm aware we aren't dealing with facts. Are you? No gods are known to exist.

God is not accountable to humans for anything; it is humans who are accountable to God. God is not in any way responsible for the choices that humans make and the ensuing actions. Everyone knows that except a few atheists. If they did not know that there could be no justice system.

The same would be if no God exists.

God does not do nothing.

Except when a dying child needs a miracle.

God sends Messengers to help all of humanity. Sorry that is not what you ordered but that is all you are getting because God is not a short order cook.

Why does God bother sending Messengers when it does nothing? What do messengers say? Sorry for cancer, I didn't do it? Messengers should say "Don't bother praying, God doesn't care. Your kid will die of cancer, Deal with it."

You do not know if God cares because you do not know the mind of God. Just because God does not remove all suffering that does not mean God does not care. In fact it means that God does care because suffering is beneficial to man.

The same result would be if no God exists. A smart God would send some examples that it cares. But it doesn't. Its almost as if it wants there to be more atheists.

The example of God helping everyone, including the innocent, is sending Messengers.

Yeah, how awesome to be on your deathbed and a Messenger shows upon to say "Goodbye, sorry God can't help."

I have not failed in this debate because I am not in a debate trying to win. I am just presenting accurate information about the real God. I cannot fail since what I present comes from God so it has to be accurate. What you present comes from your own ego so it is subject to error because humans are all fallible.

You're offering your dogma which has serious flaws.

It certainly is not a fact because God does not have a set or moral values since God is not subject to moral behavior. There is nothing more absurd than to think that.

Another reason to be an atheist and rely on our own moral sense. God obviously is no role model.

Only in your opinion, which is fallible thus subject to error. We all have personal opinions, and that is all you have. I have more than you have because I have scriptures that say that God is benevolent, not just opinions.

The difference I understand I'm fallible and my judgments have to be well supported by evidence and reasoned. You accept your dogma and assume it's correct. And as many of us point out is is highly flawed and inconsistent with reality.

You live in a complete fantasy world. Why should God cure cancer, just because you don’t like it?

I don't assume Gods exist.

Basically, what is being presented by the atheists on this thread is that God is bad because God won’t do what I want Him to do. That is childish and egotistical but your ego prevents you from seeing it for what it really is.

No, we are reading your beliefs about God and pointing out how it is inconsistent with reality. You don't like it because you are invested in your dogma. You aren't presenting facts, you are presenting your beliefs, and we are responding.

Many atheists are rational, just no atheists on this thread.

If that was the case your beliefs wouldn't be any more consistent with facts.

All the atheists on this thread have been blaming God for suffering and some are blaming God for cancer. I am not going to list them.

Given what you claim your God to be it is accountable for all that exists, including cancers. You don't like it. That's not our problem. Its your God, and your descriptions.

But I am now giving you a way out. All you have to do is say that God is not to blame for cancer and you are free and clear, but as soon as you say that God could/should have created a world without cancer you are invoking God and blaming God for cancer. You cannot have it both ways.

Gee whiz, it has nothing to do with me. You need to change your description of God first. It's the creator. It knows all. It knows cancers will be part of its creation. It is accountable for all suffering of cancers. Its simple cause and effect. You even admit your God could have created the world without cancers, but it did. It's accountable.

 

[Trailblazer]

Interesting. So where is God's brain. If it has a mind it must have a brain somewhere. Where is it?

God is not a human so God does not need a brain in order to have a mind. God’s Mind is unlike a human mind.

While the Baháʼí writings teach of a personal god who is a being with a personality (including the capacity to reason and to feel love), they clearly state that this does not imply a human or physical form.[2] Shoghi Effendi writes:

What is meant by personal God is a God Who is conscious of His creation, Who has a Mind, a Will, a Purpose, and not, as many scientists and materialists believe, an unconscious and determined force operating in the universe. Such conception of the Divine Being, as the Supreme and ever present Reality in the world, is not anthropomorphic, for it transcends all human limitations and forms, and does by no means attempt to define the essence of Divinity which is obviously beyond any human comprehension. To say that God is a personal Reality does not mean that He has a physical form, or does in any way resemble a human being. To entertain such belief would be sheer blasphemy.[15][16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_the_Bahai Faith

It sounds so simple, which is what dogma does.
Do you have any facts?

This does not come from any dogma, it comes from what I have learned and concluded from reading the Baha’i Writings. It is not dogma because it is not taught by any clergy, so if you asked another Baha’i the same questions they would give you a different answer because we all put things that we read together differently. The gist would be the same but the details would differ.

No, I don’t have facts because religious beliefs are not factual since they cannot be proven.

Well, unfortunately if you get cancer you have no choice but to deal with what God created. That's fate. Or your version of God doesn't exist.

If you get cancer you have no choice but to deal with the cancer but God did not create cancer; God only created the world and the potential was there for cancer to develop. My only sister died of cancer at age 53 leaving her only child and husband behind and and my sister-in-law died

Why, because you say so?

No because that is embedded in the scriptures, and not just the Baha’i scriptures. Whenever God reveals Laws, God is setting standards for human morality. It is also logical that an all-knowing being who created humans would know what is best for humans.

If God sets the standards for morality not only should we NEVER try to cure cancer, why should try to cause it an any opportunity. Your God's morality is terrible. I suggest it's worse than Hitler.

That is not logical in any way. Cancer has nothing to do with morality, it is a disease. The Baha’i Writings tell us that we are to use science to improve the conditions of humanity and that includes finding cures for diseases.

God did not cause cancer so it is no reflection on God. Just start a thread and ask atheists if they agree with you about God causing cancer and you will see that what other atheists think.

According to your dogma, not according to facts.

No, according to scriptures and scriptures are not dogma. What facts do you have that prove that God is not benevolent?

That people get cancer is not proof that God is not benevolent, that is utterly absurd. I would start a thread on this subject if I had time.

You bet. I'm aware we aren't dealing with facts. Are you? No gods are known to exist.

I am aware I am dealing with beliefs but beliefs can be true or false. It is not a fact that God would be malevolent if He existed, it is just your belief.

Just because God cannot be known to exist that does not mean God does not exist. God could exist without ever being known. God could exist even if there is no evidence since evidence is not what makes God exist. Evidence is just what people want in order to believe that God exists.

The same would be if no God exists.

No, it would not be the same because if no God exists then there would be no God to be accountable to.

Except when a dying child needs a miracle.

So every dying child should get a miracle, or just some children? Funny thing, believers just accept that their child is dying, they don’t expect God to save a child that is terminal.

Why does God bother sending Messengers when it does nothing? What do messengers say? Sorry for cancer, I didn't do it? Messengers should say "Don't bother praying, God doesn't care. Your kid will die of cancer, Deal with it."

Messengers do not come for that purpose and they say no such thing. People live, people get sick, people die, not only children. God is not going to save everyone from dying so why should He save some people and not others?

The same result would be if no God exists. A smart God would send some examples that it cares. But it doesn't. Its almost as if it wants there to be more atheists.

It would be the same if no God exists since God does not intervene in this world, but that does not mean that God does not exist. God sends Messengers to show that He cares but atheists reject the Messengers because it is not what they ordered. Not God’s problem.

Yeah, how awesome to be on your deathbed and a Messenger shows upon to say "Goodbye, sorry God can't help."

Why don’t you grow up and face reality? People are born, they live, and eventually they die. Sometimes their life is cut short my accidents or diseases but that has absolutely NOTHING to do with God.

The difference I understand I'm fallible and my judgments have to be well supported by evidence and reasoned. You accept your dogma and assume it's correct. And as many of us point out is is highly flawed and inconsistent with reality.

What evidence? What reason? There is no evidence and all you have is your own fallible reasoning which is basely solely on your own ego. God does not do what I expect a good God to do, therefore God is bad.

I have no dogma, I have scriptures. Do you really think I care what atheists think of my scriptures?

I don't assume Gods exist.

Why didn’t you answer my question? To rephrase, if God existed why should God cure cancer, just because you don’t like it?

If you do not believe that God exists then why do you keep talking about God as if He exists? Logically speaking if God does not exist God cannot be bad. Oh I see, if God did exist God would be a bad God because God did not give me what I want and cure cancer, because I don’t like cancer. That is just a different version of mommy I like chocolate ice cream and you have me vanilla so you are a bad mommy.

No, we are reading your beliefs about God and pointing out how it is inconsistent with reality. You don't like it because you are invested in your dogma. You aren't presenting facts, you are presenting your beliefs, and we are responding.

It is not inconsistent with reality, it is consistent with reality, it just is not consistent with what you expect reality to be, so you throw a hissy fit and blame God for the realities of the physical world. That is quite obvious to anyone who read this that is not involved in the same childish behavior.

You aren't presenting facts, you are presenting your beliefs, and I am responding. You cannot present facts because you do not have any facts, all you have are beliefs and personal opinions.

Given what you claim your God to be it is accountable for all that exists, including cancers. You don't like it. That's not our problem. Its your God, and your descriptions.

Sorry but no. That is not my description of God, that is your description of god that you project onto me. I never said that God is accountable for all that exists, including cancers. That is your imaginary god and your descriptions. Here is my description of the real God:

“Baha’is believe in an almighty creator who has fashioned the universe and has made man in his own image; they believe in a non-created cause of all existence, in a single God. The word ‘God’ is a symbol for that transcendent reality by which all existence is ruled and maintained. What we call God is not, as the critics of the concept of God believe, a product of human imagination, a creation of the mind, a fanciful invention which has no reality, or a reflection of particular social and economic circumstances.”
(Udo Schafer, the light that shineth in the darkness, p. 19)

“Regard thou the one true God as One Who is apart from, and immeasurably exalted above, all created things. The whole universe reflecteth His glory, while He is Himself independent of, and transcendeth His creatures. This is the true meaning of Divine unity. He Who is the Eternal Truth is the one Power Who exerciseth undisputed sovereignty over the world of being, Whose image is reflected in the mirror of the entire creation. All existence is dependent upon Him, and from Him is derived the source of the sustenance of all things. This is what is meant by Divine unity; this is its fundamental principle.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 167

God is not accountable for all that exists. God is only responsible for the initial the creation that He created. Nothing that developed after that is God’s doing. For example, I do not see anyone blaming God or Covid-19 because everyone knows that God is not responsible for it. That is no different from God not being responsible for cancer or any other disease.

Gee whiz, it has nothing to do with me. You need to change your description of God first. It's the creator. It knows all. It knows cancers will be part of its creation. It is accountable for all suffering of cancers. Its simple cause and effect. You even admit your God could have created the world without cancers, but it did. It's accountable.

God knows that cancer will come to exist but God does nit cause cancer becaue knowing and causation are not linked in any way.

The fact that God could have created a world where cancer would not develop does not mean God caused cancer. Take a logic course.

 

[Trailblazer]

Argumentum ad verecundiam (Argument from Authority). A poor appeal, as there is no tangible, convincing evidence that your god is The God, and has all power. All we have are claims from scripture, your claims, and the claims of your prophet. Those are no more evidence to the power and authority of your god than The Lord of the Rings is evidence to the history of the Earth.

Additionally; Or what? Terms like "listen to him and obey his warnings" sure sound scary (not really), but what is your god going to do if I continue not to listen to him? Or rather, you, because your god is suspiciously silent on many of the things that you get riled up about...

I guess you will find out after you die what God is going to do…

Then why are you here, defending the claims of GOA's omnibenevolence? If the writings of your prophet are the only thoughts you have, why do the claims of the Bible and Quran - and thus logical criticism of them - matter to you?

The criticisms don’t matter to me, and in fact the Bible and Quran only serve to bolster my beliefs that God is benevolent in spite of the fact that He can also have wrath.

Why I am here is because I am a fool, but at least I know that.

What a disgustingly immoral display of Argument from Authority and Affirming the Consequent.

Throwing out fallacies is not going to get you anywhere. God is the Authority and God is not subject to morality because God is not a human. God sets the standards for human morality but is not subject to the standards because He is not a human.

I guess this is the "or what", huh? Because we don't listen to your god (or rather what your prophet writes about what he thinks about GOA) there come disasters and suffering. Right? You've backed yourself into a corner here, blazer. You won't say it directly, but it's there. Your god is immoral and not worthy of consideration.

God cannot be immoral because only humans can be immoral. You want to demote God into a man so you can say God is subject to morality but it won’t work because God is not accountable to or subject to any humans.

Any disasters or suffering were/are for mankind’s own good and as well-deserved punishment for what their hand have wrought.

Read more if you want to know--

I've already told you that I don't care. You continuing to vomit out irrelevant writings, when we're discussing scriptural claims of Christians and Muslims, is really toeing a line for Rule #8: Preaching/Proselytizing.

No, this thread is not about the scriptural claims of Christians and Muslims, it is about the Special Pleading fallacy.

The Baha’i Writings are more relevant than the Bible or the Qur’an which were written for another age in history. That age is over so the Bible and Qur’an no longer applies. You like to use the Bible to knock God down because you know how to use it, that is plain and clear. You cannot handle the Baha’i Writings because they are too challenging.

No, it is a fact by the clear definitions of the word. Just because you'd apparently excuse child abuse because "Well, he's the father, so they must have deserved it!" doesn't make it good.

That is the fallacy of false equivalence because God is not a man so God is not in a father-child relationship with humans.

Humans get what they deserve from God and it is always just because God is just. A human father can be bad but God is always benevolent because that is one of His immutable attributes.

After much consideration, the Board has elected to deny your request. Additionally, I know you just love throwing out what you think False equivalence is, but you're wrong. I don't think the bahaullah wrote anything on logical fallacies, so I'll clarify it for you. A False equivalency is making comparisons between two subjects that have nothing to do with what is being compared. An example given in this link is comparing Jesus to Hitler just because they both have moustaches. Here we are discussing morality, not state-of-being, thus comparing Yahweh to every single notion of morality is absolutely applicable. Your pale objects to this by wailing "But he's god!" are irrelevant, and what's more they are an Appeal to Authority (you love those) and additionally an example of Ipse dixit. GOA is not special, or above scrutiny and moral judgement.

It is false equivalence. God is not subject to morality because God is not a human and God does not have behavior.

Morality: A morality is a system of principles and values concerning people's behavior, which is generally accepted by a society or by a particular group of people.
...a morality that is sexist.
Morality definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

Again, go back and actually read what is being said to you. You are here defending that claim. If it is not a claim you agree with, why are you still here?

I am still here because of all the ridiculous things people are saying.

GOA giving man "dominion over all the earth" doesn't mean that we make natural disasters, or diseases, or environmental hazards. It a claim that means we're better than fish and birds and beasts. Furthermore, if we did have such power over the Earth, everything would be a cakewalk. However, according to the scriptural and doctrinal claims regarding the GOA, we are at the mercy of the system that he created. We are set above lesser creatures, but are still lesser to him, and saying that we're responsible for what an all-powerful being does is scapegoating.

God is not “doing” anything so you just lost that one. God does not have behavior. God does not cause natural disasters, they as the result of the physical world. So yoy are scapegoating God just because you don’t like the natural world.

It absolutely does, because that is the issue being addressed. You trying to make it about your insubstantial claim is an example of Moving the Goalposts, i.e. because your religion says XYZ, the issue-at-hand of what Christianity claims is irrelevant.

Why does it matter what the Bible says? Who said we were talking about Christianity? That is unrelated to the title of this thread which is Special Pleading fallacy. What my religion says is just as relevant as what the Bible says.

Not anymore you're not. As of 11,970, Paganism has risen again and we have evidence of Abrahamic Monotheism making a marked decline. The Age of Abraham is over, and we are ushering in a new era of many gods, toppling the problems inherent in Monotheism and solving the Problem of Evil. Yay us.

Dream on…. Show me any statistics that say that paganism is on the rise.

The growth rates of the Abrahamic religions from 1910-2010 were as follows: Judaism .11%, Christianity 1.32%, Islam 1.97%, and Baha’i Faith 3.54%.

From 2000-2010 Islam became the fastest growing religion (1.86 %) and the Baha’i Faith was the second fastest growing religion (1.72%).

Statistics from: Growth of religion - Wikipedia

The growth rates of the Baha’i Faith were higher than Islam from 1910 to 2010 because it includes the “formative age” of the Baha’i Faith (1921-1944) FOURTH PERIOD: THE INCEPTION OF THE FORMATIVE AGE OF THE BAHÁ’Í FAITH 1921–1944

Growth of the Baha’i Faith has slowed down since 2000 because the new goal is consolidation and community building, so the emphasis is not spreading the Faith all over the world as it was before in the 20th century.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I guess you will find out after you die what God is going to do…

So, fearmongering then. How marvelously insubstantial.

-the Bible and Quran only serve to bolster my beliefs that God is benevolent in spite of the fact that He can also have wrath.

Then your beliefs are culpable to scriptural claims, despite your excessive cherry-picking and indecisiveness on the veracity of the bible and quran.

Why I am here is because I am a fool, but at least I know that.

Far be it from me to assume tone, but in context of the rest this certainly reads as though - according to you - I do not know I'm a fool. If that is the case it's ironic, as you've called many of us here childish.

Throwing out fallacies is not going to get you anywhere.

Nor you. Good thing I'm not.

God is the Authority and God is not subject to morality because God is not a human.

Appeal to authority and ipse dixit. What was that hypocrisy of throwing out fallacies and getting somewhere? You have zero - mark: nothing - verifiable evidence that your god is an authority on or of anything, and sets any manner of standard. All you have are three books - two of which you can't seem to make your mind up on - that amount to nothing but claims. Beliefs do not make for fact, no matter how fervently and zealously you believe in them.

You want to demote God into a man so you can say God is subject to morality--

Don't tell me what I want. By the only measurable evidence your god is immoral and foul even without being mortal. At least if he were a man we'd have something to punish, rather than wind and words.

Any disasters or suffering were/are for mankind’s own good and as well-deserved punishment for what their hand have wrought.

Yes, so you keep saying, and it's only really lowering opinion of you.

No, this thread is not about the scriptural claims of Christians and Muslims, it is about the Special Pleading fallacy.

Oooh, there's that pesky cherry-picking. And the Problem of Evil (POA), which is primarily a Christian Theology problem that extends into Islam with claims of the Quran.

You cannot handle the Baha’i Writings because they are too challenging.

Actually I have addressed and dismissed your writings because 1. they are irrelevant to the "Problem of Evil" and 2. they are excessive in their example of Special Pleading and setting providence for cherry-picking of past scriptures, "allowing" you to take the good and dismiss the bad to build some idyllic Empire of Love and Light. Additionally, they are the writings of a man from the 11,800's that we can definitely point to as mortal whom you only claim and believe is a prophet and some manner of deified. Which is, to say, completely insubstantial so far as evidence goes. Your writings aren't "too challenging" were there a relevant topic to them, and this thread ain't it.

That is the fallacy of false equivalence

No, it's not, and I've given substantial evidence to show that it is not despite your Red Herring fetish for throwing accusations of fallacies. It's getting excessively redundant, blazer, and I'm of a mind to just start reporting it for spam. It is not productive to whatever scraps of discussion remain with you, and it only serves as a pitiful, flailing attempt to discredit my arguments as fallacious in the absence of counter-evidence to disprove them rationally.

Humans get what they deserve from God--

I'll be sure to remember that for bahais as well.

I am still here because of all the ridiculous things people are saying.

About an issue of faith that you claim not to emulate. Well, you were the one who said you're a fool, not I.

God is not “doing” anything so you just lost that one.

So your god is not the one punishing us with "what we deserve from god". Noted: one less evidence that GOA exists at all.

Why does it matter what the Bible says?

Because that's what the thread is about.

Who said we were talking about Christianity?

Me, repeatedly.

That is unrelated to the title of this thread which is Special Pleading fallacy.

Go back and actually read the entire title, rather than cherry-picking it.

What my religion says is just as relevant as what the Bible says.

No, it isn't. Not here.

Dream on…. Show me any statistics that say that paganism is on the rise.

Looks like you need to read that article closer, and abstain from cherry-picking as well. And that's just Wicca alone.

 

[F1fan]

There is no inconsistency since cancer is not a goal that God has set for humans to strive to meet. Knowing God and spiritual development are the goals.

It's inconsistent because you claim god won't plan people getting cancer but that it sets goals for people. So God does have an awareness of each individual, but not enough moral concern to prevent cancers from being a burden many have to endure, even as children. So the goals your God sets for cancer patients is them having to endure the emotional and physical stress of these diseases.

God set the goals humans are supposed to achieve by creating them with a purpose in mind

Absurd since we can see no purpose to people getting cancer, especially children. Your idea of God seems to include that it has no concern about diseases. So it is responsible for setting goals but can't be bothered to stop diseases.

That is the primary purpose as is also expressed in the Baha'i Short Obligatory Prayer as knowing and worshiping God. However, the other purpose if this life in this material world is spiritual growth, developing our spiritual nature, so our souls will be prepared to ascend to the spiritual world when we die physically.

I don't see anything spiritual about these beliefs. It's just a heavy set of dogmatic statements like any other religion.

God knows what goals humans will achieve because God knows everything that will ever happen in this world, past present and future.

this claim is why God is accountable for causing genetic defects. We have already explained this. You want your god to be important and the cause for many things except for what it created that's bad.

I can’t see it because I know the definition of dogma. The Baha’i Faith has no a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true because we have no clergy. The Baha’i Faith has the Writings of Baha’u’llah, Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi; we have no doctrines or tenets. We read the Writings and decide for ourselves how to interpret them, what they mean and what to believe.

It's becoming apparent that you are so absorbed in your dogma that you can't follow the arguments that illustrate serious problems with it. That is the nature of dogma, that adherents accept the dogma and reject anything that argues against it.

I could be but I know I am not. If I don’t know after over 50 years of reading about the Baha’i Faith I would have to be pretty slow.

If you have invested so many years in a religious view you certainly won't be open to listening to how it has logical problems. Studies of believers have shown that a person has invested many years in a religious view that they are less likely to listen to criticism. One reason is how the believer may feel as if their own thinking is flawed for having spent so much time in something flawed.

I don’t assume that God exists, I know that God exists because of the EVIDENCE.
Nice try, but religious beliefs are not subject to logic since they can never be proven to be true.

Actually no one knows that any god exists. Knowledge requires a way to objectively conform that some phenomenon or thing is true or exists. Many, many theists claim they "know" their God exists. This is a desperate ploy. It's never verified as being a true claim.

 

[1213]

...More likely it means that the author of James believes his idea of god can't be tempted. And yet we have many more scriptural evidences that god can be tempted, and one shouldn't do it "or else".

"Tempting" and "testing" are also the same, in such a context of morality.

Sorry, I disagree with that. But, please show the scriptural evidence God can be “tempted”?

 

[wandering peacefully]

I did not say that all suffering would ever be eradicated, I said it would be alleviated.

What type of suffering will be alleviated if we all become Bahais which is different from what we all suffer now? If suffering is not alleviated by becoming Bahais as the claim states, what's the point of saying it? Or becoming it?

And I didn't say anything about you wanting to convince others of what you believe. Of course, no one here believes what you do. I just said it is disturbing when people choose to believe that their God will get those who refuse God's messengers. It's a personal choice to be drawn to a religion which best fits personal beliefs. This belief system sounds like it would be chosen to be believed because it is vindictive and claims the ultimate truth about everything God related. All the talk about people who suffer God's rath deserving it and getting what they've got coming to them, etc is all I was observing. People chose what they want to believe based on their personal wants and needs. No getting around that. It's what humans do.

 

[Trailblazer]

What type of suffering will be alleviated if we all become Bahais which is different from what we all suffer now? If suffering is not alleviated by becoming Bahais as the claim states, what's the point of saying it? Or becoming it?

Did I ever say that suffering will be alleviated if we all become Baha'is which is different from what we all suffer now? No, I never said that.

Trailblazer said: The way God helps people in need is by sending Messengers who reveal teachings and laws. In the teachings of Baha'u'llah He tells us specifically how the suffering in the world can be alleviated.

Everyone does not have to become a Baha'i in order for suffering to be alleviated, but if more people followed the teachings of Baha'u'llah suffering would be alleviated.

And I didn't say anything about you wanting to convince others of what you believe. Of course, no one here believes what you do. I just said it is disturbing when people choose to believe that their God will get those who refuse God's messengers.

I am sorry I apparently misconstrued what you said....

Did I ever say that 'God will get those' who refuse God's messengers? No, I never said that.
The consequence of refusing God's Messengers is not getting the message from God. That can have an effect one one's life but God is not going to "get" anyone for it.

It's a personal choice to be drawn to a religion which best fits personal beliefs. This belief system sounds like it would be chosen to be believed because it is vindictive and claims the ultimate truth about everything God related.

I agree that religion has to be a personal choice, it should never be forced. People will be drawn to a religion according to their personal interests and their values. Not everyone values the unity of mankind or cares if there is a new world order that is better than what we have now so not everyone will be drawn to the Baha'i Faith.

My religion is not vindictive nor does it claim to know the ultimate truth about everything God related. All the great religions teach the same spiritual truths because spiritual truth is eternal. The only thing that differs in religions age to age is the primary message that pertains specifically to the age we are living in (e.g. unity of mankind for the Baha'i Faith) and the social teachings and laws.

“The Purpose of the one true God, exalted be His glory, in revealing Himself unto men is to lay bare those gems that lie hidden within the mine of their true and inmost selves. That the divers communions of the earth, and the manifold systems of religious belief, should never be allowed to foster the feelings of animosity among men, is, in this Day, of the essence of the Faith of God and His Religion. These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are the rays of one Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 287-288

All the talk about people who suffer God's wrath deserving it and getting what they've got coming to them, etc is all I was observing. People chose what they want to believe based on their personal wants and needs. No getting around that. It's what humans do.

I do not agree that all people choose what they want to believe based on their personal wants and needs. Not all people are selfish so not all people are just thinking of themselves when they choose a religion. For example, It would be much easier for me to be a Christian than a Baha'i because it would not require anything of me except believing in Jesus and that Jesus died for my sins. Christians don't really have to do anything to get to heaven, because they believe they are saved by grace, so they do not even have to do good deeds or obey the Laws of God. It is not easy being a Baha'i because there are requirements to serve the Cause of God and help to build the new world order and we are also required to obey God's Laws. Not many people will choose this path because it is the difficult path, not the easy one.

 

[Trailblazer]

Far be it from me to assume tone, but in context of the rest this certainly reads as though - according to you - I do not know I'm a fool. If that is the case it's ironic, as you've called many of us here childish.

There is an big difference between being foolish and being childish.

Nor you. Good thing I'm not.

Appeal to authority and ipse dixit. What was that hypocrisy of throwing out fallacies and getting somewhere? You have zero - mark: nothing - verifiable evidence that your god is an authority on or of anything, and sets any manner of standard. All you have are three books - two of which you can't seem to make your mind up on - that amount to nothing but claims. Beliefs do not make for fact, no matter how fervently and zealously you believe in them.

You said "Good thing I'm not" and then you threw out another fallacy.

1. I make no claims. Baha'u'llah made the claims.
2. I never said my beliefs were facts. No religious beliefs are facts.

By the only measurable evidence your god is immoral and foul even without being mortal. At least if he were a man we'd have something to punish, rather than wind and words.

That is only a personal opinion, not a fact, and as such it can be disregarded.

Yes, so you keep saying, and it's only really lowering opinion of you.

Do you think I care about people's opinions of me? I only care about God's opinion of me.

Oooh, there's that pesky cherry-picking. And the Problem of Evil (POA), which is primarily a Christian Theology problem that extends into Islam with claims of the Quran.

There is no PoE except in some people's minds..

Actually I have addressed and dismissed your writings because ....
Additionally, they are the writings of a man from the 1,800's that we can definitely point to as mortal whom you only claim and believe is a prophet and some manner of deified.
Lol. What evidence do you have that any of the Prophets from the past were not anything more than mere mortals?

There is more evidence that shows that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be than there is evidence for any Prophet of the past. The fact that He is new on the scene and not many people know about Him or believe in Him is completely irrelevant.... evidence is evidence.

No, it's not, and I've given substantial evidence to show that it is not despite your Red Herring fetish for throwing accusations of fallacies.

It absolutely IS the fallacy of false equivalence to expect God to do what a human being would do because God is not equivalent to a human being. So whenever you say that a human father would not treat his child this way as an analogy as to what God should not do you are committing the fallacy of false equivalence.

False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.[1] A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".

This fallacy is committed when one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.[2] False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear scrutiny because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors.
False equivalence - Wikipedia

It's getting excessively redundant, blazer, and I'm of a mind to just start reporting it for spam. It is not productive to whatever scraps of discussion remain with you, and it only serves as a pitiful, flailing attempt to discredit my arguments as fallacious in the absence of counter-evidence to disprove them rationally.

Just became somebody does not agree with you it is spam even when they have proved you are wrong with the definition of false equivalence more than once? If you do not agree that it is false equivalence the way to deal with that is to explain why you don't think it is false equivalence, not attack me personally. If anyone should be reported it is you, for your constant personal attacks.

Because that's what the thread is about.

No, the thread is not 'about' Christianity, and not about the Bible or the Qur'an. It is about the PoE.
I know that because I just went back and read the OP. Do you see anything about Christianity, the Bible, or the Qur'an in the OP?

During the other thread, @F1fan brought up a good point I'd like to expound on here.

First, we must play some catch-up for the point presented here to make sense.

The Problem of Evil, as most know, is an argument that points out it is inconsistent for an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity to create a world in which preventable suffering exists. In a couple of other posts, I have already gone over just how physical suffering is in fact logically preventable by such a being, so I shall not do that here (I will send links to those posts in the comments if asked).

However, one theodicy that is sometimes given as a response to this observation is that perhaps suffering exists for some benevolent reason that is just unknowable to humans. This was one of the arguments examined in the first Special Pleading and the Problem of Evil post I made: if this reasoning is accepted, it can lead to a trap in which the theodicist can never escape the reasoning, and the deity could literally do any wicked thing and the theodicist would still be able to explain it away: it is a position that's impossible to be evidenced out of, in other words; and in this instance, is a form of fallacious special pleading.

There is another objection to this theodicy that I think deserves attention: the "reasoning" works both ways.

For instance, if it's a fair theodicy to say that any suffering that exists is not evidence against benevolence because it could actually be benevolent in some unknowable way, then (if such reasoning is allowed) it would also be a fair theodicy to say that any good that exists is not evidence for benevolence because it could actually be malevolent in some unknowable way: after all, in neither case is any justification actually offered by anybody since the burden of evidence is shunted into the nebulous realm of agnosticism ("we can't know how this is actually benevolent despite appearances to the contrary").

The person that accepts one but not the other is trying to have their cake and eat it, too: they both have the exact same lack of justification, they're both the same exact kind of special pleading. If a person doesn't accept the latter then they must be able to explain why they reject it, but not the former.

(I submit that we simply shouldn't allow special pleading in the first place and avoid such problems. If something has the appearance of malevolence, it is reasonable to accept it as exactly that [evidence of malevolence], until some justification is explicit and forthcoming for how it actually isn't).

#1 Meow Mix, Wednesday at 8:59 PM

 

[samtonga43]

You know that the thread is about the POA?

 

[Trailblazer]

It's inconsistent because you claim god won't plan people getting cancer but that it sets goals for people. So God does have an awareness of each individual, but not enough moral concern to prevent cancers from being a burden many have to endure, even as children. So the goals your God sets for cancer patients is them having to endure the emotional and physical stress of these diseases.

Knowing God and spiritual development are the goals God set. Why should God have preventing cancer as His goal? Since you are not God why are you setting God's goals for Him?

Absurd since we can see no purpose to people getting cancer, especially children. Your idea of God seems to include that it has no concern about diseases. So it is responsible for setting goals but can't be bothered to stop diseases.

Just because you see no purpose that does not mean thee is no purpose. The are may things in this life I cannot understand the purpose for because I am not all-knowing.

It is not God's job to stop diseases, that is what researchers and doctors are for.

This claim is why God is accountable for causing genetic defects. We have already explained this. You want your god to be important and the cause for many things except for what it created that's bad.

God did not cause genetic defects just because they exist. I have already been over this. Foreknowledge is not related to causation.
God is not accountable to humans for anything in creation because God is not accountable to humans, period.

 

[Trailblazer]

You know that the thread is about the POA?

Yes, because that is what the OP says.

 

[samtonga43]

Yes, because that is what the OP says.

Re-read

 

[Trailblazer]

Re-read

I have read it twice. What do you see that I have not seen?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

There is an big difference between being foolish and being childish.

No kidding. Well in this, at the very least, I defer to your expert knowledge of the matter on what is childish and what is foolish.

You said "Good thing I'm not" and then you threw out another fallacy.

No, you only claim I have, per your obsession in lieu of substantial argument. But that doesn't make it a fact, blazer.

I make no claims. Baha'u'llah made the claims.

Your prophet isn't here. Fact being, he's dead. You are here, and you have made many claims here, though you try to twist them with semantics and faux fallacies to appear as though you have not. We'll touch back on this later.

I never said my beliefs were facts. No religious beliefs are facts.

And yet, throughout the thread, you are stating these beliefs as fact. Definitive statements on the nature of god, the source of suffering, what responsibilities your god holds, etc etc. And what's more, if all this is opinions - sorry, beliefs - then there can be no infringements of logical fallacies. Logic has little place in discussion of beliefs. Additionally, you've stated that beliefs can be true or false, which is a matter of fact. So take your pick; are we rife with fallacies, or is this all a big ego-fluff of who's got the better beliefs?

That is only a personal opinion, not a fact, and as such it can be disregarded.

In turn so can your entire argument, and the writings of the bahalluah. Congrats, that gets us nowhere even worse than your obstinate merry-go-round of contradictions.

Do you think I care about people's opinions of me?

You should; other's opinions of us (our reputation) is really all we have. It is what carries on for us beyond death, when our flesh has returned to Earth and our bones are brittle dust. Thus far the story that you are writing of yourself is... Well, it's not flattering.

There is no POA--

Correction: That should have been abbreviated POE. But hey, that stands as moderate evidence that you're not really reading, as it's an easy mistake to really catch, yet you repeat it further down.

There is more evidence that shows that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be--

No there isn't, you just think there is. It is your belief that he is. But there is not evidence. However, remember what you said, oh, four paragraphs ago about not making factual claims on your beliefs? Yeah, this is a factual claim on your belief.

It absolutely IS the fallacy of false equivalence to expect God to do what a human being would do because God is not equivalent to a human being.

Here I'm going to break away from this repetitive nonsense that's really going nowhere, and hasn't been for the last couple of days.

If your god cannot be held to any standard of Humanity, especially in regards of morality, then you cannot say that he is good, benevolent, loving, or whatever else adorations you shower upon his name. Those are human moral standards, and by your constant vain objection those can't apply to a god. So if we are guilty of false equivalence, so are you. And the hypocrisy, the double-standards, are just astounding. You tell us that the Bible is inaccurate, that the prophets of the past gave and incomplete message, and when we provide scriptural evidence as to god's malevolence you dismiss it as inaccurate and scream and cry fallacy. Yet you've got a whole post with twenty-nine verses singing praises to how wonderful god is, from both the Old Testament and the New Testament. And what's worse is that you're drawing from books that you have, in this very thread, discounted as inaccurate. Books that also outline horrors that your god has done, which you then chalk up as "we deserved it".

You cannot have it both ways.

Just became somebody does not agree with you it is spam

No. Otherwise I'd have no time to beat my head against the wall trying to squeeze progressive discussion from a coconut.

If you do not agree that it is false equivalence the way to deal with that is to explain why you don't think it is false equivalence,

I did. And what did you do, blazer? In typical fashion you doubled down and gave the marvelous rebuttal of more of the same. It's FE because he's a god and blah blah blah. Firstly, that doesn't discount the facts just because you plug your ears and will hear no more. Secondly, as stated earlier in this post, if holding your god to a moral standard when he creates evil is false equivalence, then so is calling him good. You cannot have it both ways.

If anyone should be reported it is you, for your constant personal attacks.

Oh, you want to go on about personal attacks? You!? Let's review, working backwards. And tell you what, because I'm such a swell guy, I'll look past all the times you've assumed on the beliefs and motivations of myself and others. Your individual personal attacks:

Why I am here is because I am a fool, but at least I know that.

You like to use the Bible to knock God down because you know how to use it, that is plain and clear. You cannot handle the Baha’i Writings because they are too challenging.

Why don’t you grow up and face reality?

...all you have is your own fallible reasoning which is basely solely on your own ego. God does not do what I expect a good God to do, therefore God is bad.

Oh I see, if God did exist God would be a bad God because God did not give me what I want and cure cancer, because I don’t like cancer. That is just a different version of mommy I like chocolate ice cream and you have me vanilla so you are a bad mommy. (TKH: Comparing us to whiny children.)

it just is not consistent with what you expect reality to be, so you throw a hissy fit and blame God for the realities of the physical world. That is quite obvious to anyone who read this that is not involved in the same childish behavior.

The fact that God could have created a world where cancer would not develop does not mean God caused cancer. Take a logic course.

Ask me if I care what you accept. (TKH: Unnecessarily rude...) There are no logical contradictions for those of us who actually know something about the real God

That is what is happening on this thread, a bunch of egotistical people who think they know more than ALL the scriptures that have been revealed by God throughout the ages. It is rather sad but also quite tragic.

You live in a complete fantasy world.

That is childish and egotistical but your ego prevents you from seeing it for what it really is.

Many atheists are rational, just no atheists on this thread.

That is true but that is life and mature adults understand that suffering is part of life and they accept it. (TKH: Implying clearly that they are not a mature adult.)

Yeah, gotta be honest that's way more than I thought there would be already. And that's just back to Page 14. Do you want me to keep going (because I know you've called others childish and told them to grow up before yesterday), or do you want to amend your accusation? I think you need to humor your husband's temperance, as you're clearly losing composure.

No, the thread is not 'about' Christianity, and not about the Bible or the Qur'an. It is about the POA.

Indeed, as I said in that very post. Thank you for again affirming that you don't actually read. Again; the Problem of Evil is predominant in Christianity and Islam. You have rejected it being a problem in Baha'i, because your lot doesn't make the claims that build the Problem of Evil. Or so you claim. Yet here you are, defending and arguing or whatever the hell you're trying to do in regards to the Problem of Evil as though it's a problem relevant to your religion despite claiming that your religion has fixed said problem and doesn't include it.

So again, why are you here?

 

[F1fan]

God is not a human so God does not need a brain in order to have a mind. God’s Mind is unlike a human mind.

Sorry but the word "mind" means a set of functions a living brain performs. The phrase "God's mind" means nothing if you cannot point to a brain. It's likely just another ridiculous claim on your part.

While the Baháʼí writings teach of a personal god who is a being with a personality (including the capacity to reason and to feel love), they clearly state that this does not imply a human or physical form.[2] Shoghi Effendi writes:

What is meant by personal God is a God Who is conscious of His creation, Who has a Mind, a Will, a Purpose, and not, as many scientists and materialists believe, an unconscious and determined force operating in the universe. Such conception of the Divine Being, as the Supreme and ever present Reality in the world, is not anthropomorphic, for it transcends all human limitations and forms, and does by no means attempt to define the essence of Divinity which is obviously beyond any human comprehension. To say that God is a personal Reality does not mean that He has a physical form, or does in any way resemble a human being. To entertain such belief would be sheer blasphemy.

None of this is based in fact. Its religious dogma and only serves the interests of believers. It's otherwise irrelevant.

This does not come from any dogma, it comes from what I have learned and concluded from reading the Baha’i Writings.

That literally is an example of dogma.

No, I don’t have facts because religious beliefs are not factual since they cannot be proven.

You said something true. Well done.

If you get cancer you have no choice but to deal with the cancer but God did not create cancer; God only created the world and the potential was there for cancer to develop. My only sister died of cancer at age 53 leaving her only child and husband behind and and my sister-in-law died

You keep saying this, but you already admitted God could have created the world without cancers. So that cancers exist in this world is on your God. There is no other reason that your God choosing to create that way. You don't like it, I understand. But you have given us the framework that we are debating with and that's that God is the creator, and it is WHY things are as they are, and not some other way.

No because that is embedded in the scriptures, and not just the Baha’i scriptures. Whenever God reveals Laws, God is setting standards for human morality. It is also logical that an all-knowing being who created humans would know what is best for humans.

Gods aren't known to exist. It's most likely just humans creating laws using a God as window dressing to push some bogus authority. We thinkers are still waiting for credible evidence of any god.

That is not logical in any way. Cancer has nothing to do with morality, it is a disease. The Baha’i Writings tell us that we are to use science to improve the conditions of humanity and that includes finding cures for diseases.

Sorry but everyone else acknowledges that the creator causes what it creates at every detail, you're the exception. So if God creates a world that includes cancers, and it is also the basis for morality, the simple math is that it's moral to cause cancer, and immoral to treat it. Again, this math is because of your framework and dogma.

God did not cause cancer so it is no reflection on God. Just start a thread and ask atheists if they agree with you about God causing cancer and you will see that what other atheists think.

Your God is the creator and cancers exist because of it.

I think you keep repeating this because you're trying to convince yourself. So many have offered many analogies of how your God is accountable for creation given your description and the attributes you insist it has.

No, according to scriptures and scriptures are not dogma. What facts do you have that prove that God is not benevolent?

LOL, I love it. Seriously, the scripture says it's not dogma?

And there's no God to assess for any sort of attributes. As I keep saying we are using your claims of what you think God is. You offer no facts about a God, you offer your beliefs. If your beliefs come from scripture then you are accountable as an agent advocating for the scripture.

That people get cancer is not proof that God is not benevolent, that is utterly absurd. I would start a thread on this subject if I had time.

Given your attributes of God it very much is fully accountable, and it knows it is accountable, and it knows it does nothing to help the suffering at any time. Why would it, it decided to cause suffering on those who suffer from the start.

I am aware I am dealing with beliefs but beliefs can be true or false. It is not a fact that God would be malevolent if He existed, it is just your belief.

What makes beliefs true is if they have credible evidence that is available to the objective mind. No believers in gods can provide this, so there is a good reason to doubt.

Just because God cannot be known to exist that does not mean God does not exist. God could exist without ever being known. God could exist even if there is no evidence since evidence is not what makes God exist. Evidence is just what people want in order to believe that God exists.

A God could exist that is completely opposite to what you believe.

So every dying child should get a miracle, or just some children? Funny thing, believers just accept that their child is dying, they don’t expect God to save a child that is terminal.

because parents are powerless, unlike God.

If you had the power to cure any child of any disease just by touching them would you walk by every child in a hospital and avoid touching them? Yes or no?

Messengers do not come for that purpose and they say no such thing. People live, people get sick, people die, not only children. God is not going to save everyone from dying so why should He save some people and not others?

God doesn't save anyone from dying, you say next it doesn't intervene. So you were a bit misleading when you d that God won't save everyone. God saves NO ONE! Yeah, it's almost as if no God exists.

It would be the same if no God exists since God does not intervene in this world, but that does not mean that God does not exist. God sends Messengers to show that He cares but atheists reject the Messengers because it is not what they ordered. Not God’s problem.

If a God exists it is irrelevant.

Why don’t you grow up and face reality? People are born, they live, and eventually they die. Sometimes their life is cut short my accidents or diseases but that has absolutely NOTHING to do with God.

I love the irony.

What evidence? What reason? There is no evidence and all you have is your own fallible reasoning which is basely solely on your own ego. God does not do what I expect a good God to do, therefore God is bad.

I swear this must be a response to you by someone. But, more irony.

I have no dogma, I have scriptures. Do you really think I care what atheists think of my scriptures?

I'm neck deep in irony now.

Why didn’t you answer my question? To rephrase, if God existed why should God cure cancer, just because you don’t like it?

Yes. Me. Seven billion other people. All those who are dead from cancer.

Now, since cancers only exist because your god decided to allow it, who else likes cancer? Name one sane person who likes cancer. Your passive attitude illustrates a serious lack of empathy and humanity. This is what dogma does to people, turns them into obedient ghosts.

If you do not believe that God exists then why do you keep talking about God as if He exists? Logically speaking if God does not exist God cannot be bad. Oh I see, if God did exist God would be a bad God because God did not give me what I want and cure cancer, because I don’t like cancer. That is just a different version of mommy I like chocolate ice cream and you have me vanilla so you are a bad mommy.

Do you like cancer? You've been quite critical of me for not liking cancer. Is there something awesome about it I'm not aware of?

It is not inconsistent with reality, it is consistent with reality, it just is not consistent with what you expect reality to be, so you throw a hissy fit and blame God for the realities of the physical world. That is quite obvious to anyone who read this that is not involved in the same childish behavior.

I thought only my cats could see me throwing a hissy fit. I've tried to keep my cool on debate.

Yeah, but somehow you don't want God to be accountable for what it created and caused. I'm not sure you can make any excuse stick unless there was another creator.

Sorry but no. That is not my description of God, that is your description of god that you project onto me. I never said that God is accountable for all that exists, including cancers. That is your imaginary god and your descriptions.

I know. You want your god to be accountable for nothing that it created. That is your logical flaw. You've offered no explanation how an omniomni God isn't accountable for anything that exists. It is the ONLY reason any given thing exists, including all the bad.

Here is my description of the real God:

“Baha’is believe in an almighty creator who has fashioned the universe and has made man in his own image; they believe in a non-created cause of all existence, in a single God. The word ‘God’ is a symbol for that transcendent reality by which all existence is ruled and maintained. What we call God is not, as the critics of the concept of God believe, a product of human imagination, a creation of the mind, a fanciful invention which has no reality, or a reflection of particular social and economic circumstances.”
(Udo Schafer, the light that shineth in the darkness, p. 19)

They definitely piggybacked on Christian beliefs. And it's a pity because these are some of the worst beliefs that are irrational. The uncaused cause? Weak and laughable. A single God? A clever theist would have numerous so the blame could be spread and under debate. Transcendent reality? That's the imagination. Claiming God isn't imaginary? They didn't prove it, did they?

God is not accountable for all that exists. God is only responsible for the initial the creation that He created. Nothing that developed after that is God’s doing. For example, I do not see anyone blaming God or Covid-19 because everyone knows that God is not responsible for it. That is no different from God not being responsible for cancer or any other disease.

Sorry, this doesn't;t work logically. If a God is the only creator how do you account for bad things that exists if it isn't the ONLY creator?

God knows that cancer will come to exist but God does nit cause cancer becaue knowing and causation are not linked in any way.

God is guilty of cancer existing. The God knows, the God creates.

The fact that God could have created a world where cancer would not develop does not mean God caused cancer. Take a logic course.

Yes it does. You admit God was the decider and chose a world with cancer.

 

[Trailblazer]

You keep saying this, but you already admitted God could have created the world without cancers. So that cancers exist in this world is on your God. There is no other reason that your God choosing to create that way. You don't like it, I understand.

Your God is the creator and cancers exist because of it.
I think you keep repeating this because you're trying to convince yourself.

I don't like it? I don't really give a rip if you want to blame God for the existence of cancer. You have to have someone to blame after all, so it might as well be God.

Convince myself of what? Cancers exist because they evolved out of creation.

Sorry but everyone else acknowledges that the creator causes what it creates at every detail, you're the exception. So if God creates a world that includes cancers, and it is also the basis for morality, the simple math is that it's moral to cause cancer, and immoral to treat it. Again, this math is because of your framework and dogma.

Everyone else? I see nobody else except you and a couple of your sidekicks saying that. You are the exception, not me. Not even atheists believe what you believe, except a couple, and half of the members of this forum are atheists.

Given your attributes of God it very much is fully accountable, and it knows it is accountable, and it knows it does nothing to help the suffering at any time. Why would it, it decided to cause suffering on those who suffer from the start.

No, given the attributes of God, God it has zero accountability to humans.
God alleviates suffering by sending Messengers with a message that benefits humans, God is not a Superman who comes on down to earth and waves a magic wand.

because parents are powerless, unlike God.

You did not answer my question.
I asked: So every dying child should get a miracle, or just some children? Funny thing, believers just accept that their child is dying, they don’t expect God to save a child that is terminal.

Yes. Me. Seven billion other people. All those who are dead from cancer.

Why didn’t you answer my question? To rephrase, if God existed why should God cure cancer, just because you don’t like it?

Now, since cancers only exist because your god decided to allow it, who else likes cancer? Name one sane person who likes cancer. Your passive attitude illustrates a serious lack of empathy and humanity. This is what dogma does to people, turns them into obedient ghosts.

Do you like cancer? You've been quite critical of me for not liking cancer. Is there something awesome about it I'm not aware of?

You have no idea what my attitude is.
God does not like cancer and I don't like cancer. I just face reality, unlike you.
I also don't like Alzheimer's disease, heart disease, Covid-19, or any other diseases

Yeah, but somehow you don't want God to be accountable for what it created and caused.
I know. You want your god to be accountable for nothing that it created.

Because God is not accountable to humans for anything, period. God did not cause anything except for the original creation.

God is guilty of cancer existing. The God knows, the God creates.

 

[samtonga43]

I have read it twice. What do you see that I have not seen?

I see no reference to the POA (Power of Attorney).

 

[Trailblazer]

I see no reference to the POA (Power of Attorney).

It is PoE, not POA. Below is the OP.

During the other thread, @F1fan brought up a good point I'd like to expound on here.

First, we must play some catch-up for the point presented here to make sense.

The Problem of Evil, as most know, is an argument that points out it is inconsistent for an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity to create a world in which preventable suffering exists. In a couple of other posts, I have already gone over just how physical suffering is in fact logically preventable by such a being, so I shall not do that here (I will send links to those posts in the comments if asked).

However, one theodicy that is sometimes given as a response to this observation is that perhaps suffering exists for some benevolent reason that is just unknowable to humans. This was one of the arguments examined in the first Special Pleading and the Problem of Evil post I made: if this reasoning is accepted, it can lead to a trap in which the theodicist can never escape the reasoning, and the deity could literally do any wicked thing and the theodicist would still be able to explain it away: it is a position that's impossible to be evidenced out of, in other words; and in this instance, is a form of fallacious special pleading.

There is another objection to this theodicy that I think deserves attention: the "reasoning" works both ways.

For instance, if it's a fair theodicy to say that any suffering that exists is not evidence against benevolence because it could actually be benevolent in some unknowable way, then (if such reasoning is allowed) it would also be a fair theodicy to say that any good that exists is not evidence for benevolence because it could actually be malevolent in some unknowable way: after all, in neither case is any justification actually offered by anybody since the burden of evidence is shunted into the nebulous realm of agnosticism ("we can't know how this is actually benevolent despite appearances to the contrary").

The person that accepts one but not the other is trying to have their cake and eat it, too: they both have the exact same lack of justification, they're both the same exact kind of special pleading. If a person doesn't accept the latter then they must be able to explain why they reject it, but not the former.

(I submit that we simply shouldn't allow special pleading in the first place and avoid such problems. If something has the appearance of malevolence, it is reasonable to accept it as exactly that [evidence of malevolence], until some justification is explicit and forthcoming for how it actually isn't).

#1 Meow Mix, Wednesday at 8:59 PM