God is good but there is still suffering.

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Yes Dennet also said, he was careful enough, that surely can be sometimes used without necessarily implying a logical fallacy. Surely people should know it...

Surely studying it meticulously would result in more accurate and relevant references to it, eh? Wink

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Oh you know nothing about the nature of language and the Darwinian extinction of words when they lack utility, that much is clear. Same goes with concepts behind wording. Philosophically having a name for unified universal Logic has proven useful so far. FACT no wishful thinking. When the wording gets extinct we wont be talking about it. That's for sure. You fight ghosts...maybe if you stopped fighting them they wouldn't have the protagonism they have...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

You're an arrogant son of a bitch, and a fool for goofy philosophical claims. You are in no position to lecture me on language. That some words or locutions may have utility is not evidence for your goofy god. Try to stay on topic rather than flying off the handle because you've been contradicted.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

If and when you have anything to say about my goofy God then say it don't just imply it as a given. You have no arguments just trash talk boy. More, your are DUMB, you just don't know it. Your thought process never crosses a wall, you stump you pathetic fool ! Not even close to my toe in my lowest day...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

I've said it--your goofy god is, as you claim, the product of useful language constructs, which is just about the most hilarious line of bullshit i've ever heard peddled as an argument for the existence of a god. As usual, when contradicted, you default to personal slurs, because you don't really have arguments to support your position. What's more hilarious is that you're not even very good at that.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

It was not me you are quoting...get that right !

If you bothered to actually read and comprehend my post, I made that quite clear when I labled the quote with: - "(From FBM's quoted source)".

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Useful language constructs are what we do when we have words and what we not do when we lack them you idiot. You should by now be aware of your idiocy, you should be smart enough for that, but you keep disappointing !
Even with my poor English control I put your childish rhetoric full out for public mockery.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Yes, it's obvious that you cannot accept contradiction, and that vicious personal attacks are your only resort.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

You are quite right my apologies. I jumped the quote in a split second after recognizing it and went straight to your reply.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

There is nothing which more quickly and surely undermines theist fairy tales than the issue of suffering and "evil" in the world.

Simply asserting that does not make it true.

I gave you a plausible reason why suffering might co-exist with a God in the world. My reference to Nietzche was not to tie you or atheists in general to him but as part of my reasoning for the existence of suffering.

You gave no rationale for why my reasoning was not valid, just assertions that 'I'm just one of those deluded Christians'.

Is that the best you got?

Rats, wanted to address your list of easily answered rhetorical questions but I can't grab the list on mobile device. Will do a separate post.

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Why call him God ? Well for one because Universality of Logic deserves that place. It deserves the God coinage. Concepts don't come to existence without utility. A God concept can be useful although most of them are wrong./quote]

This was your original bullshit. You jumped int with that to comment on a post i had not addressed to your, nor in reference to anything you had posted. When i contradicted you, you defaulted to personal slurs, and your remarks became less and less coherent, and less and less relevant to the topic under discussion. Sadly, this is so often the case with you as not to be surprising at all.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Take a pill n chill bro... you where the aggressor for starters. You got what you deserved. Now if you excuse me I rather waste my time with more useful things then deal with your innate stupidity.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Where did you contradicted me ? You now delusional ? Oh man seriously get a doctor you far out...

0 Replies

On topic, a fascist stupid to stone bastard that thinks the only concept of God worth talking about is the easy one he can stone with easy street pot shots is self described...

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

This is the BS i responded to:

Leadfoot wrote:

No, we can't rule out a benevolent God on the basis of suffering.

Do you actually know what the word benevolent means? This is why Epicurus' statement (including those rhetorical questions which you claim are mine, and claim you are technologically unable to respond to) is to the point. If you silly imaginary friend cannot end suffering, he is not omnipotent. If he won't he is not benevolent. You don't seem to be able to comprehend what is really a simple exercise in logic.

Quote:

At one point I posited that suffering was one of the few things that prompt people to even consider the existence of God.

So you sneer at me for what you allege are unsubstantiated claims, but you're happy to do it yourself? That's par for the course with theists, who are nothing if not hypocrites.

Quote:

Not that God inflicts suffering, but he's cognizant of the effect it can have.

Yeah, well, you cartoon god would have to be cognizant of everything if he's allegedly omniscient. I'll leave aside the completely false claim that your god does not inflict suffering.

Quote:

Even the atheist Nietzche agreed on the benefits of suffering.

If you weren't offering Nietzsche as some kind of atheist "theologian," why did you mention that about him? Your rhetorical skills are very poor.

Quote:

Maybe he wants you to make that choice.

Once again, maybe "he" is just a figment of your imagination, upon which you obsessively insist.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Rhetorical questions are almost always based on false assumptions. There are lots of them here.

Quote:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

First, being omnipotent is an assumption. He is not. Omnipotence is a logical fallacy. Not being able or willing to prevent evil assumes that he never does or will.

Quote:

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Always preventing 'evil' would of necessity preclude free will. Precluding free will would be inconsistent with a benevolent God. (the only kind I'd be interested in arguing for)

Quote:

Is he both able and willing? Then whence comes evil?

Your free choice to choose.

Quote:

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

Because he is both able and willing but chooses to give us the chance to do it ourselves.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Yeah, you did lard that down with a lot of false assumptions. I congratulate you for warning us of them in advance.

(EDIT: An ordinary exposition of christian theology, apart from the claim that your god is not omnipotent, which you inferentially contradict later. You are not convincing in your pose of theistically independent thinker.)

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

Yeah, you did lard that down with a lot of false assumptions. I congratulate you for warning us of them in advance.

Such as?

Again, long on accusations, short on examples and reasoning.

BTW, the rhetorical questions laiden with false assumptions were from your list. I supplied answers, not questions.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Setanta is a documented long well know case of the kind of person who can't at all go on more then 2 posts without resorting to insults. Surely a psychological condition. When people react to his irrationality he then plays the card of victim. Nothing but a street cowboy posing as a deep thinker. Nothing on his wallet but trash talk...ordinary as they come, leave it.

2 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

That's hilarious, coming from you. Irony's a bitch.

0 Replies

God is good but there is still suffering.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know