Your biggest intellectual compromise for faith

[Willamena]

I'm happy to go with anyone's, as long as we make it clear from the beginning what it actually says.

That implies it has an "actual" meaning (the Scotsman's), which is in itself a whole 'nother debate.

 

[tarasan]

Wait... you acknowledge that your position is logically indefensible, but you don't consider it to be an intellectual compromise?

no i found I couldnt defend the problem of evil for those reasons.

No, it wouldn't. If an alcoholic with a failing liver would die without a transplant, then the transplant will cause more good than harm. Extending the person's life, even a short time, is a good thing.

The only reason that harm is caused is because the abilities of the medical establishment are constrained: there aren't enough livers to go around, so giving a liver to one person means you can't give a liver to someone else.

indeed in this scenario Im showing that there are good reasons even today when we withhold help and have good reasons for it.

Are God's abilities constrained? Does he withhold his blessings because he only has a limited supply?

your pushing my analogy It was merely to show you that there are times when even we have good reason to let people suffer, such as kemotherapy sergury and the like, my question is why dont you think God can do the same thing?

A question for you - one that I think I may have asked you before in other threads: if we're so morally deficient that we mistake God's perfectly good actions as perfectly evil, then how would it be just to pass judgement on our moral choices? After all, apparently, we can't tell the difference between right and wrong, can we?

you hanvt asked me this question before no.

the reasoning is that he doesnt! the claim is that in times during your life you have fallen short of even your own standards. I think Paul goes into that in Romans (i hope I aint misquoting)

 

[tarasan]

First, if he's going to give me that opportunity, and make the consequences of decision so extreme, it would be nice if he gave me all the information for sure. It would be a much easier decision, if God gave it to me directly and told me the specific consequences.

ahhh but then you wouldnt expereince anything now would you? so you dont like the inconvience of a hard decision? fair enough

But why? Even if there's no way for an omnipotent god to give me free will and make me happy, why choose free will? As I said, I'd take heaven, where I'm perfectly happy all the time with no pain and suffering. If I had kids, and I had the option of letting them live on Earth and letting them live in heaven, I'd choose heaven for them.

you wouldnt be in heaven because you wouldnt exist, you are your choices arnt you? it is impossible for you to exist without free will.

 

[PolyHedral]

you wouldnt be in heaven because you wouldnt exist, you are your choices arnt you? it is impossible for you to exist without free will.

No, you are your personality, which is derived from memory and is consulted to make choices. That personality can still exist without free will.

my question is why dont you think God can do the same thing?

Because every reason I can imagine for letting people suffer relies on the fact that we are limited by physics, the universe, etc. God isn't. None of the reasons I can think of are justifiable for him.

 

[tarasan]

No, you are your personality, which is derived from memory and is consulted to make choices. That personality can still exist without free will.

you wouldnt have a personallity merely Gods in another form. youd be like a puppet on a string

Because every reason I can imagine for letting people suffer relies on the fact that we are limited by physics, the universe, etc. God isn't. None of the reasons I can think of are justifiable for him.

how about the one about us suffering would let us see what a world without Gods perfection would be like therefore we wouldnt make the same mistake as adam?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

no i found I couldnt defend the problem of evil for those reasons.

Wait... which reasons?

indeed in this scenario Im showing that there are good reasons even today when we withhold help and have good reasons for it.

But all those reasons for withholding help are rooted in human failings and imperfections. You said that God can't fail and must be perfect, so therefore none of them are available to God.

your pushing my analogy It was merely to show you that there are times when even we have good reason to let people suffer, such as kemotherapy sergury and the like, my question is why dont you think God can do the same thing?

Chemotherapy and surgery involve suffering because we flawed, limited human beings haven't figured out a way to get the same significant benefit without causing some measure of suffering. Is God subject to these limitations? Can he not figure out how to heal someone's tumour without strickening them with horrible nausea or making their hair fall out?

you hanvt asked me this question before no.

the reasoning is that he doesnt! the claim is that in times during your life you have fallen short of even your own standards. I think Paul goes into that in Romans (i hope I aint misquoting)

Wait - so if it's our own standards we're supposed to go by, then what exactly are you arguing?

By my standards, the God depicted by mainstream Christianity is evil; end of story. If I am judged against my failure to meet my own standards, I would be condemning myself if I followed him, wouldn't I?

 

[tarasan]

Wait... which reasons?

that I cannot account for every reason an omniscient omnipotient god would have for witholding help, I mean I could speculate, but ultiamtely I cannot achieve the knowledge that an omnipotient God would, so unless it was logically impossible for an omniscient omnipotient God to not have a good reason then the claim is really mute.

But all those reasons for withholding help are rooted in human failings and imperfections. You said that God can't fail and must be perfect, so therefore none of them are available to God.


Chemotherapy and surgery involve suffering because we flawed, limited human beings haven't figured out a way to get the same significant benefit without causing some measure of suffering. Is God subject to these limitations? Can he not figure out how to heal someone's tumour without strickening them with horrible nausea or making their hair fall out?

why cant the world condition be rooted in human failures? If god made us free why cant we be the ones who chose?

Wait - so if it's our own standards we're supposed to go by, then what exactly are you arguing?

By my standards, the God depicted by mainstream Christianity is evil; end of story. If I am judged against my failure to meet my own standards, I would be condemning myself if I followed him, wouldn't I?

the idea is that there are definate standards of good and evil, Paul argues that even if you claim those are unfair for those who dont know, even by our own standards we have failed, because we have never fully kept even those.

 

[Magic Man]

ahhh but then you wouldnt expereince anything now would you? so you dont like the inconvience of a hard decision? fair enough

Huh? Why wouldn't I experience anything? And what is this about the inconvenience of a hard decision? All I'm asking for is all of the facts that relate to the decision. All I would want is for God to say "I'm real, and there is a heaven and hell, and here is how you get to each place...". It's not about making the decision easier. It's about making it an informed decision. And I would still be able to experience everything.

you wouldnt be in heaven because you wouldnt exist, you are your choices arnt you? it is impossible for you to exist without free will.

No, it's not. Is it impossible for angels to exist? This is a good example of mental gymnastics. I am a personality. I could still be a personality without free will. Do you believe in heaven where we go after we die? Do we have free will there?

 

[Magic Man]

you wouldnt have a personallity merely Gods in another form. youd be like a puppet on a string

Sure, you'd be sort of like a puppet on a string, but you could still have a personality. Again, do you believe in heaven, a place where our spirits go after we die?

how about the one about us suffering would let us see what a world without Gods perfection would be like therefore we wouldnt make the same mistake as adam?

But who cares? There's no need for that. Don't put us in the same situation as Adam, and don't make there be a world without God's perfection. Just give us heaven, and make us perfectly happy. Although, Adam's a perfect example. He and Eve were just fine and dandy until God gave them another option and the ability and strong desire to try it. Take away the other option, the ability and the strong desire to try it, and Adam and Eve remain happy.

 

[Magic Man]

that I cannot account for every reason an omniscient omnipotient god would have for witholding help, I mean I could speculate, but ultiamtely I cannot achieve the knowledge that an omnipotient God would, so unless it was logically impossible for an omniscient omnipotient God to not have a good reason then the claim is really mute.

The point is that that is logically impossible. There is no good reason for an omnipotent, omniscient, loving god to allow suffering and pain.

 

[tarasan]

The point is that that is logically impossible. There is no good reason for an omnipotent, omniscient, loving god to allow suffering and pain.

you havin done well in showing that mostly because you cant account for how a omniscient God would think, because quite frankly your not all knowing. and youve only been focusing mainly on our happiness, but what if a loving God is willing to sacrifice your happiness for something greater? you see these are the little nooks in the plan and you have soon me nothing to prove otherwise.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The point is that that is logically impossible. There is no good reason for an omnipotent, omniscient, loving god to allow suffering and pain.

That seems to depend on how much somebody is willing to compromise the definition of omnipotent and/or love.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Im saying that we cant make a move either way because your right you cant account for every possible reason that an omniscent might have for permitting evil and suffering, its just something that I have found impossible to defend.

to the olympic swimmer analogy. I beleive this statement doesnt represent God, I help people because I see no good reason not to help them, for example i dont see any deterent from helping a person who is obviously drowning, however I would have a good reason not to help some say who isnt elegible for a liver transplant and who refuses to stop being an alcholic, because it would only cause more harm than good if I helped them.

the fact is we cannot know why God chooses to not make a big scene and save someone but in my opinion we have no reason to think he doesnt have a good reason.

(a tougue tangler there)

This is a dangerous argument when followed to its l logical conclusion. Clearly, Jesus expects people to help those in need and not pass them by as evidenced by his famous Good Samaritan parable. To claim that a being who does not do this may have a good reason of which we are not aware because we cannot know his mind is an argument that can be applied to ANYone. You have no reason to think that Charles Manson, Osama Bin Laden, Hitler or any other "evildoer" did not have good reasons for doing what they did for exactly the same reason You cannot know their minds any more than you can know God's.

DO you think that Manson might have had good reasons for his actions? If not, what reason could you possibly have?

 

[tarasan]

Huh? Why wouldn't I experience anything? And what is this about the inconvenience of a hard decision? All I'm asking for is all of the facts that relate to the decision. All I would want is for God to say "I'm real, and there is a heaven and hell, and here is how you get to each place...". It's not about making the decision easier. It's about making it an informed decision. And I would still be able to experience everything.

hasnt he already? with the bible? also in Romans it shows us that for those that search for God genuinely then he will reviel himself to them, so your lost there as well im afriad.

No, it's not. Is it impossible for angels to exist? This is a good example of mental gymnastics. I am a personality. I could still be a personality without free will. Do you believe in heaven where we go after we die? Do we have free will there?

yes on your part, because if your persoanlity is being manipulated by God to do what he wants you do then you will not exist.

and angels have free will and we will when we are in Heaven.

 

[Beaudreaux]

you havin done well in showing that mostly because you cant account for how a omniscient God would think, because quite frankly your not all knowing. and youve only been focusing mainly on our happiness, but what if a loving God is willing to sacrifice your happiness for something greater? you see these are the little nooks in the plan and you have soon me nothing to prove otherwise.

An omnipotent God does not have to sacrifice anything to achieve anything.

 

[Beaudreaux]

hasnt he already? with the bible? also in Romans it shows us that for those that search for God genuinely then he will reviel himself to them, so your lost there as well im afriad.





yes on your part, because if your persoanlity is being manipulated by God to do what he wants you do then you will not exist.

and angels have free will and we will when we are in Heaven.

Will there be sin in heaven?

 

[tarasan]

This is a dangerous argument when followed to its l logical conclusion. Clearly, Jesus expects people to help those in need and not pass them by as evidence by his famous Good Samaritan parable. To claim that a being who does not do this may have a good reason of which we are not aware because we cannot know his mind is an argument that can be applied to ANYone. You have no reason to think that Charles Manson, Osama Bin Laden, Hitler or any other "evildoer" did not have good reasons for doing what they did for exactly the same reason You cannot know their minds any more than you can know God's.

DO you think that Manson might have had good reasons for his actions? If not, what reason could you possibly have?

well mostly I would disagree with that because lets be frank, they arnt omniscent, and they stated their reasons for doing what they did quite openly didnt they? the fact is that while we have evidence for what people do and what they intend through their actions and what they say we dont really have that from God do we? so while we can deduce what people are like through there actions we cant do it with God.

and again let me ask you this it is fact that we dont know enough to call God evil or uncaring so why naturally assume that from our view he is? why make the mental gymnastics to "he must have no reason"?

 

[tarasan]

An omnipotent God does not have to sacrifice anything to achieve anything.

very well what if decides it would be better for you to unhappy for a while?

I mean he could make you happy all the time, but if he thinks there is something to be gained for making you go through hardships?

 

[PolyHedral]

In order for God to not be willing to eliminate evil/suffering, etc, something inherent about them must be useful. They cannot be a prerequisite to something else, or teach us anything, otherwise they are unnecessary. They must be intrinsically of value, which is a very slippery position.

 

[tarasan]

Will there be sin in heaven?

no because people will have gone through the suffering here on earth, so that when they do get into heaven they will not do what adam did.