Friends getting religious

[S.A.M.]

So you do seem to have some idea of how to judge God's benevolence.
To what does God's benevolence apply, in your opinion? The universe? Earth? Living things? Humans as a whole? Individuals?

I don't think we are more special if thats what you mean, just more aware.

Also, how you distinguish benevolence from indifference?

The same way I do for anything else. Indifference does not require any accountability.

 

[Pete]

]The same way I do for anything else. Indifference does not require any accountability.

What accountability?

 

[S.A.M.]

What accountability?

For one thing, how did you get my quote under la-la lands name?

For another, even atheists search for meaning in their lives.

 

[Pete]

For one thing, how did you get my quote under la-la lands name?

No idea, but it was probably something stupid on my part. Fixed now.

For another, even atheists search for meaning in their lives.

Yes, but what accountability?

 

[S.A.M.]

Yes, but what accountability?

Thats it. I've often wondered why.

 

[(Q)]

Is that your view of your life? Its a purposeless existence that just "is"?

I never said that, that is your misrepresentation of what I said.

 

[Pete]

Thats it. I've often wondered why.

What do you mean?
Are you saying that if someone feels an urge to seek purpose in their life, then this implies that something must be accountable for that purpose?

 

[S.A.M.]

What do you mean?
Are you saying that if someone feels an urge to seek purpose in their life, then this implies that something must be accountable for that purpose?

No. I believe that its inherently contradictory to want a purpose in your life when you believe there is no God [I'm not going anywhere, but this is the map I am using]. So I assume its part of the balance. I have met theists who are willing to bet on a forgiving God and hence are happy to sail through life without much purpose. But I have never encountered a similar response in an atheist. The idea of a life without purpose seems abhorrent to them, even when they believe that universally, its all to no purpose anyway.

 

[(Q)]

The idea of a life without purpose seems abhorrent to them, even when they believe that universally, its all to no purpose anyway.

You appear incapable of leaping beyond the concept that people can create their own purpose to their life, yet have nothing to do with cults and their self-serving obedience.

 

[S.A.M.]

Why do you need a purpose in your life, when you think its all purposeless universally anyway?

 

[tuberculatious]

I just take a coffee in the morning to get me going in the purposeless universe.

 

[Lori_7]

You gave an overly complicated, rambling, and vague answer to a straighforward question.



I didn't need to know the gender, I did specify 'non gender specific', quite clearly in my choice of words.

Does she talk to God also?

Your definition of life partner is what is vague. If you're asking if I have had sustained and fulfilling intimate relationships with people during the course of my life the answer is yes and my "rambling" was an elaboration of that answer.

 

[iceaura]

I believe that its inherently contradictory to want a purpose in your life when you believe there is no God

And yet, as you note, many of those without deities nevertheless do seem to be able to handle the apparent contradiction without difficulty.

And they find your setup a little odd. This business of inventing a deity and imaginatively equipping it with the proper nature to then supply the right sort of purpose for one's life seems needlessly roundabout, to them. They ask: Can you possibly be unaware of your own role in all of that?

Why do you need a purpose in your life, when you think its all purposeless universally anyway?

If you have to first determine the existence of purposes for the entire universe before recognizing any for your own life, you're in a bit of trouble, wouldn't you say?

Can't we start a bit smaller, with the purpose of the nearest tree or something? At least we might imagine that the tree has a context of its own, from which to derive meaning and purpose and so forth.

 

[(Q)]

Why do you need a purpose in your life, when you think its all purposeless universally anyway?

Again, you make the same critical error asserting that purpose is some sort of a requirement or need for life.

Too much indoctrination, I suspect.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

-=-

I either have purpose or not regardless of whether gods exist. No god could give me purpose.

If nature was designed & created, it was done so by a malevolent sadist.

 

[Pete]

No. I believe that its inherently contradictory to want a purpose in your life when you believe there is no God [I'm not going anywhere, but this is the map I am using].

Having a purpose means precisely that you have chosen a destination. Planning the journey at some level is recommended, but optional.
I really don't see how you reason that choosing a set of goals implies belief in an omnipotent benevolent entity.

So I assume its part of the balance. I have met theists who are willing to bet on a forgiving God and hence are happy to sail through life without much purpose. But I have never encountered a similar response in an atheist. The idea of a life without purpose seems abhorrent to them, even when they believe that universally, its all to no purpose anyway.

I think that your sample might be biased. If someone is an atheist and also someone who chooses to just drift through life, then why would they bother to advertise their atheism?

 

[scifes]

What a cop out. 'God moves in mysterious ways', ... so why do Christians cry when their babies die? They should rejoice that God has acted directly in their life and praise the great baby killer!

they might've grown up to be serious killers..
we trust god, but it doesn't mean we can't have feelings..

By making that statement, you are making conclusions about what god wants while at the same time telling me straight out I have no idea what god wants. Contradict much?

yes i'm afraid i did contradict myself..i DON'T know what god is up to..but you can see it as a mere example of a course of action that makes sense..simply provs you wrong.

And of course, you are stating that cancer is better for humans, despite the fact humans are doing everything in their capacity to cure cancer. In other words, humans are trying to deny what their god thinks is better for them.

isn't what's in bold better for humans?

Did you know that cancer causes excruciating pain and suffering. And, since you know so much about what god wants, please explain why excruciating pain and suffering is better for humans?



So, what about humans decision to cure cancer? You continue to contradict yourself.



More contradictions. If the Quran is "essential for human survival" then why would god create cancer as a perfect way of life?



So far, you've been stating that cancer is better for humans and is part of a perfect life. How is that clear?



So, humans are flawed and ignorant for trying to cure cancer?



So, being a Muslim is being contradictory? Got it. And, no thanks.



I wouldn't want you to step out of your comfort zone of contradiction.

you're just crippling me here man..venting out your anger or something..sorry if i was offensive in any way..:huh:

Theists call it 'heaven'.

in heaven human's makeup is altered to suit pure joy and undisputed happiness..humans as they are now will never settle heaven..

But I assume will be utterly absent in our second lives, (well - those who go to heaven at any rate)? If pain and suffering is absent from heaven then it's clearly 'bad' and 'evil'.

i explained that..

I disagree.

1. Ok, it's a very easy statement to make considering it is the only reality we actually know. A man without nipples would look extremely strange in our reality but that doesn't argue that it is essential for men to have nipples - indeed I would typically suggest otherwise. It isn't in any way essential but it is a fact of existence.

From here we progress to question whether pain and prolonged suffering could really be considered 'essential'. Given the context of discussion we must do so from a god exists/religious understanding.

2. Your statement only reflects the very basics. I am unsure exactly how anencephaly could be considered 'essential for development'. Should you have ever got anencephaly, it simply wouldn't have been possible for you to have ever developed in any way whatsoever.

You instead seem to be thinking along the lines of cuts and bruises - "ouch that hurt, best not crash my bike again", which certainly might aid our existence in this fallen, chaotic, world of suffering but interestingly any 'loving' parent would remove that pain if they were able. It is only due to our inability that we have no choice but to put up with it.

Sometimes we cause suffering - for instance when we take our children to be inoculated. We cause them suffering, (not prolonged), in order to help them. The pain of the injection, the benefit of freedom from future disease. But as a 'loving' parent, we would remove that pain if we could - we have no choice but to allow that pain because it shields our loved ones from further and more serious pain, (prolonged suffering).

Is prolonged suffering 'essential'? I don't see the argument. I've never had prolonged suffering of any form and yet I seem to have somehow made it here without needing to have gone through it. That's not to say that I wont in the future, but I don't see where you could possibly then assert that it is essential that it happen. Why would cancer be essential? What's it going to do for me other than kill me that an omnipotent entity couldn't have managed to bring about without it? If I got cancer and died, would that aid my development more than not getting cancer? How so?

If we delve further into your world of "essential development" we come up with some truly bizarre things. Strange as it might sound, some 30 or so people die every year from meteorite impact, (can't remember the source, sorry - and it could be inaccurate). Was that somehow essential for their development? Is it somehow essential for a rock to fall out of space and land on someones head? If it is not essential what are you saying? If not essential, are you claiming it is gratuitous? If so, do you not have a problem with gratuitous suffering?

3. We live in a fallen world. A world of anarchy and chaos. Was it essential that the fall happen? If we say yes we remove any blame from humanity and then can only say that a god has specifically designed us to suffer. This raises question of morality. If we say no, there goes any argument to it being essential.

If Adam and Eve had have just literally kept their mouths shut, we would be in a world without pain and suffering - which was cursed upon us due to their mistake. If they hadn't have eaten the fruit - we would be in a different world, one without pain and suffering - and not be claiming that a fallen world of suffering is essential.

4. What about predation? Would you assert that predation is essential? Does the fly somehow 'essentially develop' by having the spider eat it? What of the cow that has it's throat slit. Is that suffering somehow essential? Kindly explain.

5. Finally: You stated that "one could argue that it is essential". Kindly do so. Telling me that parents don't spoil their child, (many do - in fact one of my best friends was incredibly spoiled but has turned out quite alright), isn't an argument to anything.



I disagree. Of course if you're the kind of person that would suggest that god might be evil then such argument wouldn't be worth making. Most don't make that suggestion however.



I will leave you to stick to whatever it is you want to stick to. Kindly show the same respect.

i somewhat get what you're saying..but can't find a handle to a reply..

“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa

I am compelled to be useful because people have problems I can help with. If people didn't have those problems, I'd be fine with not being useful. ”





Absurd arrogant assinine assumptions.
You are a fool if you think you know me better than I do.
I have no idea how it would be yet you do?
You're fine with people being sick, uneducated, hungry & poor?
The purpose of life is to have problems?

my point is simple..
people live to get better.
they can't get better if thre isn't worse.

-=-

If I were omniscient & omnipotent, that would not be the logical course of action.

the fact is
YOU
are NOT.

 

[S.A.M.]

Can't we start a bit smaller, with the purpose of the nearest tree or something?

Of course. But its like coming across a brick in your path and arguing that such obvious symmetry must have a creator then looking at the universe and declaring that its obviously random.

Again, you make the same critical error asserting that purpose is some sort of a requirement or need for life.

Are you declaring that its not?

Having a purpose means precisely that you have chosen a destination.

Exactly. But when you declare your entire journey to be without purpose, why would you seek a destination?

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

my point is simple..
people live to get better.
they can't get better if thre isn't worse.

The purpose of life is to get better???

the fact is
YOU
are NOT.

Irrelevant.

 

[Enmos]

people live to get better.

People live because they don't want to die.