"Evil objection" is an offhand objection against presumed character of God, not an argument against existence of God. — Henri
Much more emotional than result of an effort to understand how God can create a world with evil in it. — Henri
I'm saying that since he endowed us with free will, it is we who choose what is good and what is evil. God may well disagree, but then a read of any one of his autobiographies will show that he has a rather nasty disposition. One hopes he has been misquoted.Not to mention that you are basically saying that in case God exists you are more moral than Him. — Henri
Just so; If he does exist, he is not a nice fellow."Evil objection" is an offhand objection against presumed character of God, not an argument against existence of God. — Henri
But, hey, maybe you can somehow justify that all suffering (without exception) is warranted?5. consistent with a largely indifferent universe, and non-teleological biological evolution
If the objection is an accurate one based on the character of a specific God as portrayed via its followers and its "holy texts", then it is not offhand. It at least shows that this specific God is either evil and a liar or at most doesn't exist at all. — ProbablyTrue
Out of curiosity, what would you consider a legitimate argument against the existence of God? — ProbablyTrue
Is all suffering (without exception) part of the plan of this supposed deity you mention, or is it up to us to come up with relief as best we can (e.g. medical research)? — jorndoe
Why do you just defer to The Bible? — jorndoe
only Bible reveals that a human is not capable of bringing himself or herself to God, so salvation from this state is 100% on God's grace. — Henri
From what I can tell, there is no justification in the western tradition, at least, for thinking that anyone can know anything about God... I'm not claiming that you don't have that understanding. I'm claiming you CAN'T have that understanding. Neither can I, of course. — Bitter Crank
James 2:26, "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. — Buxtebuddha
Not that God personally causes suffering but God allows suffering to exist. — Henri
Everything you mention as humanity's effort - for example medical research, educated veterinarians and social care workers, negligence laws put in place, etc - is given for us to do as part of God's decree. — Henri
And that's a big subject, not for this thread. — Henri
And my conclusion is that atheists, both in general and those most prominent ones, are:
1) quite unreasonable in interpreting what nature provides as clues for or against God
2) quite unreasonable in their reasoning about God — Henri
Nothing you wrote on this thread provided any reasonable argument for atheism. Maybe you can go back to the OP and provide an argument for atheism, not voice your opinions about God of the Bible. — Henri
Nothing you wrote on this thread provided any reasonable argument for atheism. Maybe you can go back to the OP and provide an argument for atheism [...] But as I said, there is no reasonable argument for atheism, so distraction is next best thing [...] — Henri
Anyway, we can't talk about atheism without first having talked about theism: You make some fantastic claims. You call yourself theist. I don't believe your claims. You call me atheist.
[...] an unreasonable behaviour. — Henri
[...] there are basically two options - Christianity on one side and everything else on the other. [...] Bible is much more complex that any other text I have read or examined, it is in a different league. — Henri
That god exists is the premise on which the OP is constructed. No argument is given to suport the existence of God; Deny His existence, and the argument falls apart.Only after I came to an understanding that God exists... — Henri
But which arguments? They are not presented, but simply gestured at; there is a pretence that the OP is about denying atheist arguments; it doesn't happen....I started to look into atheistic arguments more closely. — Henri
And my conclusion is that atheists, both in general and those most prominent ones... — Henri
1) quite unreasonable in interpreting what nature provides as clues for or against God — Henri
2) quite unreasonable in their reasoning about God — Henri
The amount of blank ammunition atheists generally use against God makes me think that atheism itself is a miracle. Meaning, it's not something natural, but interruption of nature forced from something outside of our observable world. — Henri
Still not a single one reasonable argument for atheism. — Henri
There are few atheists who will argue actively that God does not exist. Atheist arguments ubiquitously take the form of dismantling arguments for the existence of God, usually by showing their inconsistency. — Banno
The point is that you posit the existence of something for which there is no evidence whatsoever, except perhaps in wishful thinking. — tim wood
But any argument for atheism is unreasonable. As evidenced by this thread. Not that this particular evidence was needed. — Henri
:-OOn the other hand, no evidence is not reasonable argument for those who favor non-existence of God. — Henri
This post, and the thread's OP exemplifies what I understand to be low quality posting. — Akanthinos
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.