The problem is that those who *claim* to have such abilities don't seem to agree with each other. The stories are never consistent. Sort of like what you would see if each person is just giving their own opinions with no reality behind them.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Special Pleading and the Problem of Evil
- Thread starter Meow Mix
- Start date
The problem is that those who *claim* to have such abilities don't seem to agree with each other. The stories are never consistent. Sort of like what you would see if each person is just giving their own opinions with no reality behind them.
Ok, next time I see a kid drowning, I will keep reading my magazine and enjoy the sun. For it is the see that killed him.
CIao
- viole
That is precisely what OP does, though. Given the premises, God is exactly culpable for “this kind of world.”
Sure, but the PoE is concerned with whether God is omnibenevolent. If God is sometimes malevolent, the PoE does not apply in the first place. But then we must question whether such a being deserves worship.
The OP literally lays out a way in which God could have created benevolently. This line if attack by reversal does not work.
So, do you rejoice when a kid dies? You must also be pro abortion, right?
You should, for if what you say is true, dying immediately is really the best thing that can happen to those kids. How lucky they are to die from a bone cancer at age 1 month. A risk free ticket to something that they would otherwise have to earn during decades in a fallen world. That is totally unfair against us, who lived long enough to risk what they could not possibly risk.
It would be like choosing between getting home immediately vs. getting home if you manage first to walk through a long minefield. What would you choose?
So, why is God so unfair, to give them such an advantage?
Ciao
- viole
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Please let me know the next time you SEE God killing anyone, of you can locate God on your GPS tracker.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Of course I do not rejoice when a kid dies, and I do not rejoice when anyone dies. Why are kids more important than adults?
No I am anti-abortion, but that is a good point you raise. Does God cause all these children to die from abortions and have their lives cut short, millions and millions? No, women choose to have abortions, mostly because they are selfish.
According to WHO, every year in the world there are an estimated 40-50 million abortions. This corresponds to approximately 125,000 abortions per day.
Abortion Statistics - Worldometer
That is a straw man. I did not say that kids dying is the "best thing" that can happen to them. I said that if they do die, God takes care of them in the spiritual world (heaven).
God is not unfair because God is not responsible for their deaths. Death is just a part of life and some people die sooner than others.
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I don't think that is a logical conclusion. It is more logical to realize that different people will have different beliefs about what God does, even within the same religion. Not all Muslims believe that God sends tests. Some Baha'is believe that God sends tests and some Baha'is don't believe that. It is all because of the way that they interpret their scriptures, and that will vary among people.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Who said that? God does not kill children, children die.
Adults also die but nobody seems to care about them. I wonder why.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Nor did the real God do that. Scientific evidence proves that.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Because they have free will to choose to act on their impulses.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
And that is all God is responsible for. After the world was created God was out of the game and humans were responsible for everything that happened because God gave man dominion over the world.
God is never malevolent. Just because some cry baby adults don't have everything their way, that does not make God malevolent.
How logical is that?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
You said in your OP:
"This is a form of special pleading: normally when we see someone allowing suffering, we conclude that they're malevolent or at least criminally negligent. But in the case is God, a special case is made appealing to the fact that God is powerful and knowledgeable; so we can't conclude that God allowing the suffering is malevolent."
Your argument falls flat on its face because it is patently illogical. What you have is a logical fallacy whenever you compare God with a human and expect God to do what a human would do because God is not equivalent to a human. God is not Superman who comes swooping down to save everyone nor does God have any such obligation. To expect God to do that is special pleading
special pleading: argument in which the speaker deliberately ignores aspects that are unfavorable to their point of view.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=what+is+special+pleading
Not only that, your argument assumes that there is no reason for suffering, and that all suffering is bad.
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".
Characteristics
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. The pattern of the fallacy is often as such: "If A is the set of c and d, and B is the set of d and e, then since they both contain d, A and B are equal". d is not required to exist in both sets; only a passing similarity is required to cause this fallacy to be used.
False equivalence arguments are often used in journalism[3][4] and in politics, where flaws of one politician may be compared to flaws of a wholly different nature of another.[5]
False equivalence - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Well, lot of children going to heaven risk free. And the problem is?
and that is not the best thing that can happen to them?
You don’t understand. The disadvntage ia ours. The survivors. Not the kids who go straight to heaven.
ciao
- viole.
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
It seems perfectly logical to me, especially when you consider that even people of the same religion can't agree on what their god does or doesn't do. Clearly this 'scriptures' method god uses to get his message across isn't very effective. It's almost as if people can interpret those scriptures to mean whatever it is that they want.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
The problem is that they never had a chance to live life. This was not because of an incurable disease, this was because someone chose to end their lives. One was unpreventable, the other was preventable.
Did I ever say that was the best thing? I only ever said that if children die they will be recompensed by God.
That's very true, it is more difficult for those of us who are left behind.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
What I meant is that it is not logical to assume God does not exist just because people disagree on the meaning of scriptures. People can interpret some scriptures differently but there is a consensus among believers on the primary message the Messenger sought to convey, and that is what really matters.
Messengers and scriptures is the only method that could ever work at all. There is no perfect method because when you are dealing with humans some mistakes will always be made since humans are fallible. There is no way around that.
Wouldn't the world be better without pedophiles? I asked why your god created a world where pedophiles existed. You didn't explain why God included them in its creation.
So you're saying claims and divine texts can't be trusted as truth about a God. And we should trust facts and reason, and be skeptical.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
God did not create pedophiles, they created themselves by choosing to be pedophiles.