As I wade through all the garbage that is so popular these days, one question keeps coming back to me. I've been rearranging my circles so I don't have to see all the attacks by people that have offended me, so I might have missed it,but.... If anybody can explain it for me I'd be glad to listen.
If there is no God, how could He have caused so much misery.
I will not respond negatively to any legitimate attempt to explain. I will remove any personal attacks by anyone else too. People are hesitant to discuss openly in a hostile environment so please keep it civil.*
*Yes - I mean you, my fellow believers. Be nice.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
That doesn't make any sense to me. I don't mean this as an attack. Why does there have to be a god for there to be misery? Man creates it just fine on his own.
ReplyDeleteIf there is no logic, how could a fish ride a bicycle?
ReplyDeleteVery carefully.
ReplyDeleteYep. I respect the right to have a religion, as long as it is used for the right reasons. The second it is used as a tool of hate or violence, I no longer respect the person using it that way.
ReplyDeleteMy point exactly - I get mad when humanists try to say that humans are basically perfect but for the horrible evil influence of their gods.... I say, if people are the problem, blame people.
ReplyDeleteAre we truly being asked to discuss the sophism, God must exist because He makes people suffer?
ReplyDeleteNot to be rude, but I believe the correct answer to the question of misery is, sh*t happens. Either that or we need to start wondering why God hates Texas. The drought and the fires? Perry has obviously gotten Yahweh seriously pissed off.
Yeah, I think religion is good for people who see the world in black and white, and use it to stay in the "white" side of the spectrum. Although I would much prefer people see the shades of grey and get over themselves.
ReplyDeleteAlana McKay - I propose that science is also a human attempt to understand things. I think we can all agree that science has made tools available that have caused horrific suffering too. And yet, for some reason, I have not seen any posts regarding how stupid, immoral, and vile scientists are lately.
ReplyDelete(if this is "over the top" let me know and I'll remove it)
You shouldn't remove it. I agree with you about that. The thing that makes me prefer science is that it pays attention to new evidence, and gets information from many sources, not a book that is thousands of years old and was written by people with a much smaller understanding of the world.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I have seen lots of posts about how science is awful... on facebook... by religious people. Google+ seems to have more tech-savvy people.
"humanists try to say that humans are basically perfect but for the horrible evil influence of their gods."
ReplyDeleteReally? Quotes please. Are are you deliberately misconstruing humanists or seriously not understanding what they mean when they say Much evil has been perpetrated in the name of God. They are not saying that God exists and causes suffering. They are saying that too many believers use some imagined God as an excuse for their own misdeeds.
As a religious person I would like to just say - yep, you bet. religions and religious people to a great extent are horrible - to Atheists indeed but to each other just as much. Maybe more even since un-believer might be "saved" but wrong-believers, well ... sputter, fume, gasp - wrong believers ack! Where is my stake, get me some kerosene, quickly....
ReplyDeleteThe question as stated seems meaningless to me, or at best awkwardly put. Was there a particular humanist philosopher you were meaning to quote? Or perhaps accidentally misquoting? There is a logic gap or something I'm just missing.
ReplyDeleteScience is a human attempt to understand things, making use of the scientific method. Religion is a human attempt to understand things, making use of fairy tales. Once we get that distinction out of the way, the real debate begins: How do we prevent people from harming people, no matter what tools or technology they use?
ReplyDeleteIt reminds me of this one: "If you mistake a rope for snake, it's not the snake's fault." ~ John Dobson 1991.
ReplyDeleteWell put.
ReplyDeletejohn adams Yes, that is what he meant, but he was not saying those are his beliefs. He was pointing out the horrible things people do when they have different religions.
ReplyDeleteYes, but that rope deserves a whipping!
ReplyDeleteHadrian Micciche So because some people have done bad things for some excuse does that mean that they should not have access to that excuse. Then we should also destroy national boundaries, money, cultural heritage and "cheer leading as a competitive sport" too ?
ReplyDelete*no offense intended - some of my best friends are cheer leaders
Since we are indulging in some faulty logic, lets try this. If suffering proves God's existence, than happiness makes him disappear! Ergo -- its sinful to smile because then you've killed Kenny God.
ReplyDeleteted kelly So because some people have done bad things which they try to excuse by saying they are doing God's will, should we prevent people from saying that they are doing good things because its Gods will? Both of groups of people are mistaken but only one group is doing harm. I believe we should to allow people their harmless delusions and call bull-shit on the wrong-doers.
ReplyDeleteHere's a thought. Religion doesn't kill people. People with religion kill people. <---joke.
I maintain that by putting derisive labels on things you chose not to believe is harmful to open discussion. If we simply cannot go any other way then I insist that all artists, monagamists, novelists and other fairy-tale believing people are mocked equally. In that case I would like to say that since there are some questions that science has yet been unable to answer - All science believers are wicked and foolish and must at the very least be branded or tarred and feathered - or something...
ReplyDeleteHadrian Micciche my stream is acting up - I saw your last in notifications but not on the thread.... Sure bullshit it is - I would like to say otherwise but you nailed it with the good guy/bad guy thing...
ReplyDeleteWhy is having open discussion more valuable than warning people about danger? Should we stop labeling poison as poison because that inhibits open discussion, like, Hey, look at that guy! He drank that stuff and now he's dead! Lets have a discussion about it!
ReplyDeleteYou wish to ban the willing suspension of disbelief involved in enjoying fiction because some people can't seem to distinguish reality and fantasy? Do we ban imagination because of a few insane people who can't get out of their hallucinatory trance? This is not a metaphor by the way. I'm being literal. Someone hallucinates that a dog bit him so we should banish all paintings of dogs?
Brad Snowder No particular quotation - I've just run into a bunch of antitheist lately masquerading as atheists.
ReplyDelete"there are some questions that science has yet been unable to answer."
ReplyDeleteDoes science have all of the answers? No. Does religion have all of the questions? No. Religion only has one answer and no questions.
Hadrian Micciche I agree with you on that, but we can't just condemn religious people, for the following reasons:
ReplyDelete1) They may be using those stories as excuses to be good people and help others.
2)We are never going to reach an agreement if we don't toss our differences to the side, while celebrating them.
3) It makes us no better than the assholes calling us "godless heathens" and the like.
4)It gives atheists and agnostics a bad name.
Hadrian Micciche I have, like I mentioned in next comment, run into more than a few antitheists (active ones) hiding behind the label of Atheism. I feel that they are entitled to spread their word too. I just think that they should be honest about it.
ReplyDeleteted kelly In summary:
ReplyDelete1. You begin by offering a obvious sophist argument, a very basic logical fault. You haven't acknowledged that or offered a valid logical argument to replace it.
2. You've offered an unfounded assertion of "what humanists say" and failed to provide any quotes to prove your claim.
3. You've offered one false equivalency after another, all easily rebutted.
Basically, you are pulling out a bunch of rhetorical tricks (that I've seen before, mind you, and they are as silly now as they were before) or you seriously don't know how to have a serious argument. If this is a tactic, you are being too clever by half. You are not doing believers any service. Either you are unwilling or incapable of making a sensible argument. Is there a point in continuing this discussion? Is the Pope Polish?
There may be many answers to that question. I was offering a forum and indeed saw more than a few enlightening and some entertaining ideas come my way. I apologize if I wasted your time, I sort of was enjoying it. I also am sorry if I offended you. I enjoy your point of view on things even, well especially, when they are different from my own. Hadrian Micciche
ReplyDeleteNicholas Brattoli
ReplyDeleteNo, we can't condemn religious people but we ought to condemn criminal behavior.
Yes, we can reasonably warn people about dangerous beliefs, like God will cure your cancer. Using medicine is disrespecting God.
Yes, we can condemn people who act to restrict our personal freedoms by making their religion public policy. We can note that our public officials do not place their hand on the Constitution and promise to uphold the Bible.
Yes, we can say that "Freedom of religion" means we can also be "Free of Religion."
No, we don't need to "celebrate our differences" when people say we can't do the things we can reasonable claim we can do, or say we should do that which we can reasonably claim we are not obliged to do.
I agree with you on most of those points. By celebrate our differences, I mean respect them, and let people have their opinions. For instance, someone from another country coming to America does not have to act like an American. Culture is a good thing.
ReplyDelete