Problem of evil, is this a satisfying answer?

[Koldo]

These are all great atheist arguments but they are thinking that existence ends at death. Believers think death is just a step like graduating kindergarten. What does pain matter when considering eternity?

It is logically incompatible with an omnimax God. This is why it matters.

 

[Road Warrior]

Whether suffering is temporary is absolutely irrelevant to the argument being made.

Disagreed. Kids hate vaccinations. Which is the greater evil: Giving a kid a painful vaccination or not giving them any at all?

It is logically incompatible with an omnimax God. This is why it matters.

Disagreed. The fact you can't see it is your problem, not mine.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

These are all great atheist arguments but they are thinking that existence ends at death

No, they don't.

Believers think death is just a step like graduating kindergarten

That's strange because when believers see their kids graduating kindergarten, they are all proud and laughing and cheering.

Not so much when they die.

What does pain matter when considering eternity?

It's kind of hard to argue about morals if the one you're talking to doesn't seem to have a moral compass and/or a seriously warped sense of empathy.

 

[Koldo]

Disagreed. Kids hate vaccinations. Which is the greater evil: Giving a kid a painful vaccination or not giving them any at all?

You are still thinking of circumstances that are only applicable to humans but not God.
Would it be evil to vaccinate a child if you could just snap your fingers to protect them with the same efficiency ? Or more importantly, would it be at least less good than snapping your fingers to protect them ?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

In the greater scheme of things, it is. Of course, Atheists think they only have one life to live and they are dead, dead, dead. Believers thinks it's just a step.

You are free to think all believers are asinine (note the spelling). I certainly think the angry young anarchist atheists on this forum are asinine.

1. I didn't call all believers asanine (tnx), i called your particular analogy asanine

2. I'm neither young (at least, i don't think so) nore an anarchist

3. when you handwave away allowing 5-year olds dying from leukemia after a lifetime of suffering and moving in and out of hospital beds, and even compare that to the "bother" of having to go to school.... then I really don't know what to tell you in a conversation concerning morals. You are exposing a kind of moral bankrupcy that I just don't know how to deal with, to be honest with you.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Disagreed. Kids hate vaccinations. Which is the greater evil: Giving a kid a painful vaccination or not giving them any at all?

How is that analogous to allowing 5-year olds to die from leukemia after a lifetime of suffering and moving in and out of hospital beds?

And like @Koldo said, we're talking omni-stuff gods here....
The alternative to giving a painfull vaccination, isn't just not giving him one.
It's snapping your fingers to magic desease away. No pain and maximally perfect and flawless results. Every single time.

 

[Road Warrior]

No, they don't.

That's strange because when believers see their kids graduating kindergarten, they are all proud and laughing and cheering.

Not so much when they die.




It's kind of hard to argue about morals if the one you're talking to doesn't seem to have a moral compass and/or a seriously warped sense of empathy.

Awesome. You get a Gold Star from the Atheist club!!

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Awesome. You get a Gold Star from the Atheist club!!

View attachment 30114

How juvenile.

 

[Road Warrior]

How is that analogous to allowing 5-year olds to die from leukemia after a lifetime of suffering and moving in and out of hospital beds?

And like @Koldo said, we're talking omni-stuff gods here....
The alternative to giving a painfull vaccination, isn't just not giving him one.
It's snapping your fingers to magic desease away. No pain and maximally perfect and flawless results. Every single time.

5 years of pain versus eternal bliss. That's how.

 

[Road Warrior]

How juvenile.

Then I expect you've have me on ignore from now on since it would be silly of you to converse with someone you consider to be juvenile.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

5 years of pain versus eternal bliss. That's how.

"versus"?

So, 5 years of unecessary suffering then.

What is more evil?
5 years of pain followed by eternal bliss
or
eternal bliss.

 

[We Never Know]

No, they don't.



That's strange because when believers see their kids graduating kindergarten, they are all proud and laughing and cheering.

Not so much when they die.






It's kind of hard to argue about morals if the one you're talking to doesn't seem to have a moral compass and/or a seriously warped sense of empathy.

I know many believers. Yes like anyone they hurt when they lose a loved one. That's being human. Ask them in a week, in a month, in a year and they will tell you that their loved one is in a better place and much happier.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Then I expect you've have me on ignore from now on since it would be silly of you to converse with someone you consider to be juvenile.

Nah, I don't do ignore except for in extreme troll cases that aren't sincere.

I think you are sincere.

 

[Road Warrior]

"versus"?

So, 5 years of unecessary suffering then.

What is more evil?
5 years of pain followed by eternal bliss
or
eternal bliss.

Neither.

Yes, but he's also saying that because God doesn't do that then either God isn't omnipotent or that God doesn't exist. That's a false conclusion as any Deist knows.

Pain ≠ Evil

 

[Road Warrior]

Nah, I don't do ignore except for in extreme troll cases that aren't sincere.

I think you are sincere.

Translation: I didn't really mean my previous insult. I was just angry and frustrated.

No worries, dude.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Ask them in a week, in a month, in a year and they will tell you that their loved one is in a better place and much happier.

And yet, they continue to experience extreme grief, sorrow, sadness, etc.

I must resist digging into this subject because it would seriously side track.

In a nutshell: the behaviour of mourning that I observe in believers is not at all consistent with their supposed belief that their loved one is happily enjoying eternal bliss in a better place and that they'll meet again when they are dead as well.

The larger point though, to get back to the discussion at hand, is that clearly - also in the eyes of the believer - life (and the experience thereof in terms of happy or suffering) is a LOT more valueable and precious then @Road Warrior is implying.

He's like "in the great scheme of things none of anything that happens here is of any relevance".
CLEARLY that is not the case.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Neither.

I'll rephrase so that you can't weasle out of it by playing dumb, then.

What would be more evil (or "less good" if you prefer):
- To just provide eternal bliss
or
- to first force someone through 5 years of unnecessary extreme agony and only after that provide eternal bliss.


Remember that we are talking in context of the one providing the bliss and forcing the suffering as being an omnipotent being. Mean that it COULD choose not to have the subject endure 5 years of extreme agony, would it care to.

So, which is more evil?


This seems as far as I can go. I've shown you the water. Now it's upto you to drink it and come to the seemingly obvious conclusion.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Translation: I didn't really mean my previous insult. I was just angry and frustrated.

No worries, dude.

No, there's no apology.
I'm also not angry nore frustrated.

And I genuinly and honestly think your post there was just juvenile.

You should stop trying to read between the lines. You're not very good at it.

 

[We Never Know]

And yet, they continue to experience extreme grief, sorrow, sadness, etc.

I must resist digging into this subject because it would seriously side track.

In a nutshell: the behaviour of mourning that I observe in believers is not at all consistent with their supposed belief that their loved one is happily enjoying eternal bliss in a better place and that they'll meet again when they are dead as well.

The larger point though, to get back to the discussion at hand, is that clearly - also in the eyes of the believer - life (and the experience thereof in terms of happy or suffering) is a LOT more valueable and precious then @Road Warrior is implying.

He's like "in the great scheme of things none of anything that happens here is of any relevance".
CLEARLY that is not the case.

Let's don't side track. Last post. You can miss someone, be sorry their gone and still be happy for them.

 

[Road Warrior]

I'll rephrase so that you can't weasle out of it by playing dumb, then.

What would be more evil (or "less good" if you prefer):
- To just provide eternal bliss
or
- to first force someone through 5 years of unnecessary extreme agony and only after that provide eternal bliss.


Remember that we are talking in context of the one providing the bliss and forcing the suffering as being an omnipotent being. Mean that it COULD choose not to have the subject endure 5 years of extreme agony, would it care to.

So, which is more evil?


This seems as far as I can go. I've shown you the water. Now it's upto you to drink it and come to the seemingly obvious conclusion.

Thanks for the false accusation of weaseling but obviously you missed my posts on "evil". Ergo, your loaded question is nonsensical.

Dude, you are free to believe there's no god(s) because there is pain in the world. You are free to believe that we're all ambulatory meat robots responding to biochemical programming and of no more value than our component parts. You are free to use the argument that because there is pain in the Universe there is no god or that because of pain, the "god" is evil, uncaring, whatever. In short, you are free to use whatever self-serving argument you desire. I can't answer the question if there is existence beyond mortal life or not, but I do believe there is. YMMV