One atheist’s idea on how to prevent evil

Koldo · Aug 3, 2019

PureX said:
Presuming "God" to be the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that exists would imply that existence (interdependent and interrelated) is of a holistic concern to that source.
Well, the omnibenevolence would by universal; not especially humane. So from our perspective God might seem to be "evil". While from the perspective of omnibenevolence, viewed as universally "good". Many things can be deemed horrific from a particular perspective, and yet deemed to be of great benefit from a larger, meta-perspective.

What does it mean to be universally good ?
It seems like what you are saying is like: if we had a distinct perspective we might see what is good and evil differently. To a certain extent you are correct, but if it has no relation with improving well-beings, in what sense is it omnibenevolence ?

PureX · Aug 3, 2019

Koldo said:
What does it mean to be universally good ?

Existence, exists. That is universally "good". It is better to exist, than not to exist, because not existing erases the question of quality all together. Thus, the source of all that exists, is automatically and universally 'benevolent'. And any alternative consideration is logically moot.

Koldo said:
It seems like what you are saying is like: if we had a distinct perspective we might see what is good and evil differently. To a certain extent you are correct, but if it has no relation with improving well-beings, in what sense is it omnibenevolence ?

See above. To exist is automatically and universally preferable to not existing. Therefor, from an existential perspective; the source, sustenance, and purpose of existence (whatever that "God" is), is "good".

Trailblazer · Aug 3, 2019

Shad said:
Conquest of Canaan. Exodus.

Those are not MY scriptures.

Koldo · Aug 3, 2019

PureX said:
Existence, exists. That is universally "good". It is better to exist, than not to exist, because not existing erases the question of quality all together. Thus, the source of all that exists, is automatically and universally 'benevolent'. And any alternative consideration is logically moot.
See above. To exist is automatically and universally preferable to not existing. Therefor, from an existential perspective; the source, sustenance, and purpose of existence (whatever that "God" is), is "good".

Well, that ended up in an unexpected place. I was hoping for something else. But I digress...

How did you reach the conclusion that it is better to exist than not to exist ? I grant that life has to exist before we get to gauge quality of life. But it doesn't follow that whoever created it is good, because evil also requires life. Let me give you an example: Imagine I give birth to a child with the intent of torturing it until death and get to follow through with it. Was that preferable to not giving birth at all ? Would you call me good ?

Plus, even if you call me good then to call me omnibenevolent I would need to keep giving birth at the utmost speed I can, and if I were omnipotent... Do you see the problem ? Where is the infinite number of living beings?

Unity of Mankind · Aug 3, 2019

Road Less Traveled said:
Any talents given to someone by something else was never their own choice of talents.

True. So what? The point is not to waste them but rather to spend them on yourself and others.

Road Less Traveled said:
I have no interest, need, or want in being praised by any humans. Also could care less if any human deplored me. Why should that differ for a god? Any talents given to someone by something else was never their own choice of talents. Whatever is handing out abilities and talents... I’d much rather them be given to someone who needs them than myself.

Most people do not have that choice. Their minds may be able to think about that and have knowledge of that, yet humans come with a survive at all costs mechanism initially overriding choice there. Not a matter of choice, but nature.

This life is the best it can possibly be in this world after 30 years of ignorance and lack of power/ability to control and realizing it was never my own life and own choices, and something foul living vicariously in me that I never asked for performing actions and a lot of thinking in me(that of which I never chose to have that something else gave me.) As well as all of the factors from others and my exterior environment that molded. I am not thankful for my health, as others have poor health. I also do not need to see others poor health in order to learn what good health is. That would be selfish, and needing to learn at the expense of others. I am not thankful for any food that I have, as many others do not have food. I am not thankful for the roof over my head, as many others do not have a roof over their head. I’m not thankful for being an employee(a kind word for slave) yet I do not have a choice in the matter, and many others don’t have the abilities that are in me or a job.

I do agree that for all of the different circumstances people are born into, the sooner they recognized and became aware as to exactly what they were in, to use what little autonomy that they may have to make the best and most of it.

If we created a child and brought it into this world, now fully aware of all of the possible and potential outcomes for this child.... all that happened to it and what it did to others would be our responsibility. Especially if we had the power to design it’s nature and potential and gave it choice, as well as designing the world we brought it into and all of the worlds potential. Once it became fully aware and also in full control of itself, cut the umbilical cord from its parents, and then chose on its own to be an autonomous/free individual would it become responsible.

Now that you have the knowledge that nobody asked to exist, have a lower selfish nature, asked to be given choice, and all of the other circumstances and conditions born into, and different laws they never asked for, never asked to have the potential to do certain things, have the nature to be able to do certain things, have the lack of power to be able to control doing certain things, having ignorance to many things: how can anyone be held accountable? Will you blame humans? Will you have mercy on humans? Would something that held humans accountable for how it made them and their potential, giving them choice be maligned?

Lower ‘self’ or false ‘self’ or ‘selfish’ are poor words to begin with and deceptive since it’s not someone’s ‘self’ to begin with, and had no choice in the matter. Yet, used for communication. And yet used to trick others and blame others for a lower ‘self’ that was never even them to begin with. Deceitful by making people think it’s themselves that are performing and doing the actions.

So are you saying we should have a choice of being born or not before we are even born? What you leave out is a real God speaking through Prophets. What truths they bring forth are either valid or not. The fact that you were not consulted about how you came to be created strikes me as more than a little absurd.

Road Less Traveled said:
I have no interest, need, or want in being praised by any humans. Also could care less if any human deplored me. Why should that differ for a god?

Unless there is such a thing as a real God?

Unity of Mankind · Aug 3, 2019

It Aint Necessarily So said:
All of that can be had without religion, messengers, or god beliefs. Secular humanists are typically interested in mans potential for nobility and in his own self-actualization.

Is that what you see going on in the world today? Do you ever turn on the TV and watch the news?

It Aint Necessarily So said:
All of that can be had without religion, messengers, or god beliefs. Secular humanists are typically interested in mans potential for nobility and in his own self-actualization.

And how successful would you say their interest in man's potential for nobility is in bringing it about? Also, you are leaving out entirely the breakdown of law and civilization. What does that have to do with self-actualization? I would say if real answers did and do not come forth through real Messengers of God, despite the interest of secular humanists, what can be ascertained now going on by merely turning on the TV and watching the news, mankind as a whole is teetering on the precipice of destroying itself.

PureX · Aug 3, 2019

Koldo said:
Well, that ended up in an unexpected place. I was hoping for something else. But I digress...

How did you reach the conclusion that it is better to exist than not to exist ?

There is no logical comparison to be made. Non-existence can't be good or bad.

Koldo said:
I grant that life has to exist before we get to gauge quality of life. But it doesn't follow that whoever created it is good, because evil also requires life. Let me give you an example: Imagine I give birth to a child with the intent of torturing it until death and get to follow through with it. Was that preferable to not giving birth at all ? Would you call me good ?

"Evil" is a relative assessment being made within and because of the gift of being. Good is universal (it is good to exist). We can choose evil, and we can choose to succumb to it. But we can only do so from a position of being, and knowing the innate goodness of being. Evil cannot stand alone. Goodness can, and does. It's an existential axiom.

Koldo · Aug 3, 2019

PureX said:
There is no logical comparison to be made. Non-existence can't be good or bad.
"Evil" is a relative assessment being made within and because of the gift of being. Good is universal (it is good to exist). We can choose evil, and we can choose to succumb to it. But we can only do so from a position of being, and knowing the innate goodness of being. Evil cannot stand alone. Goodness can, and does. It's an existential axiom.

You have not justified anything you have stated, therefore I don't see the need to accept any of it. If you can build up an argument I would be interested.

PureX · Aug 3, 2019

Koldo said:
You have not justified anything you have stated, therefore I don't see the need to accept any of it. If you can build up an argument I would be interested.

I'm not here to convince anyone of anything. Only to offer my views, and to discover those of others. I do not see existence as a mindless machine, and consciousness as some sort of pointless anomaly that the machine accidentally produced. I see that existence requires, and it the expression of will, and of effort. And that it therefor must have intrinsic value to justify that will and effort.

Koldo · Aug 3, 2019

PureX said:
I'm not here to convince anyone of anything. Only to offer my views, and to discover those of others. I do not see existence as a mindless machine, and consciousness as some sort of pointless anomaly that the machine accidentally produced. I see that existence requires, and it the expression of will, and of effort. And that it therefor must have intrinsic value to justify that will and effort.

Whatever floats your boat.

Unity of Mankind · Aug 3, 2019

PureX said:
"Evil" is a relative assessment being made within and because of the gift of being. Good is universal (it is good to exist).

I would say evil is like a flashlight turned off. Evil does not exist in and of itself so how could it be assessed?

However, with the coming of every new Prophet or Messenger sent by God spiritual qualities of goodness are taught through which evil deeds can be avoided entirely.

Baha’u’llah wrote that religion is the chief instrument for order in the world and that the vitality of belief in God is dying out in every land. I would say due to this many people lack a sense of spiritual inner defectiveness and fall prey to the notion that the purpose of our existence is merely to be consumers in a fool’s paradise. Such a false paradise is quickly disappearing!

Unity of Mankind · Aug 4, 2019

Road Less Traveled said:
humans come with a survive at all costs mechanism initially overriding choice

What about soldiers knowingly sacrificing their lives to save their buddies on the battlefield? I think they already had spiritual convictions and that is what they instantly acted on.

In other words, there was no suspension of choosing due to your imagined theory of survival at all cost mechanism. Soldiers either had strong spiritual convictions or not when it came to going beyond the call of duty.

It Aint Necessarily So · Aug 4, 2019

Trailblazer said:
You do not seem like someone who is going against the teachings of Baha’u’llah and I cannot think of any laws of Baha’u’llah that would be difficult for you to follow.

Then your religion might be more compatible with secular humanism than some others. But I"m not looking for anyone to follow. I follow me - my own insights and judgments.

Trailblazer said:
What you would get would be additional happiness, the spiritual happiness I described

I explained that I already have that, and am not interested in the religious version, which confuses spirits and spiritual.

Trailblazer said:
Without His program, the world situation will only continue to worsen and there would be no hope for the world.

I have no reason to believe that. I think I have an as good or better program based on its results.

Trailblazer said:
Baha’is believe it is our responsibility to build the Kingdom of God on earth

Secular humanism advocates the same without religious overtones.

Trailblazer said:
the salient point is that if God exists and sends Messengers to guide us it would be wise to heed their call.

Also, if that doesn't happen, it would not be wise to follow such people making such claims.

Trailblazer said:
It is absurd to think that God should intervene and prevent a rape.

For me, it is more absurd to think that any agent capable of preventing a rape but didn't is good.

Trailblazer said:
God is not going to intervene in the world to reduce suffering

As I've noted in the past, this god always chooses exactly the choice that would be imposed on a godless universe, in this, failing to intervene. That's exactly what we expect if there is no interventionalist god, like what we see with every other of these alleged choices.

Trailblazer said:
Unfortunately, some faith is necessary to believe in what cannot be proven

Agreed, but I'm not interested in believing what can only be believed by faith. I'm interested in what is correct.

IndigoChild5559 · Aug 4, 2019

Anyone that suggests a world where only good choices are possible either doesn't have the intelligence to understand that "good" cannot exist unless evil exists, or they simply don't care about free will and could care less if human beings are pre-programmed robots instead of God's children. God, I think, is both smarter and more caring.

oldbadger · Aug 4, 2019

Trailblazer said:
I have an atheist poster on my forum who says it is god’s fault there is evil because god, if he exists, makes evil choices available to humans.

Atheist: Any being who would make evil choices available would be an evil being. Therefore, if god exists, god is to blame for evil, not humans.

He says that god could arrange it so only good choices are available for people to make and that would prevent evil.

So I asked him to explain precisely how God could make only good choices available to humans and I asked him to explain HOW this would play out in the real world we live in. Below is his answer:

Atheist: Try having a real omnipotent god who could see to that.

As you can see he could not answer HOW a real omnipotent God could make only good choices available to humans.
I have asked him three or four times and still no answer.

How could an omnipotent God make only good choices available to humans? Any ideas?

They were probably offering an intellectual idea for discussion, is all.

Atheists, like Bahais do not accept that Evil exists.
True?

Trailblazer · Aug 4, 2019

oldbadger said:
They were probably offering an intellectual idea for discussion, is all.

Atheists, like Bahais do not accept that Evil exists.
True?

The atheist poster in the OP says that if god exists god is evil.

The reason he thinks god would be evil is because god allows evil to exist, and he thinks that god should remove all evil because god is omnipotent, even though humans cause the evil. He thinks god should only provide good choices for people so they could not make evil choices and that would prevent evil in the world.

Trailblazer · Aug 4, 2019

IndigoChild5559 said:
Anyone that suggests a world where only good choices are possible either doesn't have the intelligence to understand that "good" cannot exist unless evil exists, or they simply don't care about free will and could care less if human beings are pre-programmed robots instead of God's children. God, I think, is both smarter and more caring.

Sadly, it is all of the above.

And he really believes all this stuff with more conviction than an ardent religious believer.

Trailblazer · Aug 4, 2019

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Then your religion might be more compatible with secular humanism than some others. But I"m not looking for anyone to follow. I follow me - my own insights and judgments.

It is more like secular humanism, but I can understand you not wanting to follow anyone. I am the same way, why I am called Trailblazer.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
I explained that I already have that, and am not interested in the religious version, which confuses spirits and spiritual.

I understand, I was just explaining why you would get because you asked. Spiritual happiness can be attained without God but God adds another component, IF one believes in God and loves God.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
I have no reason to believe that. I think I have an as good or better program based on its results.

Of course you have no reason to believe that because you do not believe in Baha’u’llah and what He brought. What program do secular humanists have to change the world?

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Secular humanism advocates the same without religious overtones.

What program do secular humanists have to build a new world order on earth?

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Also, if that doesn't happen, it would not be wise to follow such people making such claims.

No, it would not be wise to follow people making such claims unless their claims were true.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
For me, it is more absurd to think that any agent capable of preventing a rape but didn't is good.

Why should God be responsible to prevent what He did not cause, something humans cause and are fully capable of preventing? I know, because God is omnipotent.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
As I've noted in the past, this god always chooses exactly the choice that would be imposed on a godless universe, in this, failing to intervene. That's exactly what we expect if there is no interventionalist god, like what we see with every other of these alleged choices.

As I've noted in the past, there is no reason to think that in a universe where God exists a God would intervene. The reason we do not see that is because God gave man free will.

It Aint Necessarily So said:
Agreed, but I'm not interested in believing what can only be believed by faith. I'm interested in what is correct.

It could be correct even if some faith is necessary to believe in it. Maybe you mean you are interested only in what can be proven.

oldbadger · Aug 4, 2019

Trailblazer said:
The atheist poster in the OP says that if god exists god is evil.

The reason he thinks god would be evil is because god allows evil to exist, and he thinks that god should remove all evil because god is omnipotent, even though humans cause the evil. He thinks god should only provide good choices for people so they could not make evil choices and that would prevent evil in the world.

I can perceive an agnostic suggesting that, but can't understand an atheist proposing such ideas, because of course, atheists do not believe in God, Satan' or evil.

Bahai's don't believe in evil, or so my wife told me.

Road Less Traveled · Aug 4, 2019

Unity of Mankind said:
True. So what? The point is not to waste them but rather to spend them on yourself and others.

I’ve seen enough talents being used to control, blame, condemn, and threaten humans with everything that they better do this or do that or else according to their indoctrination’s (manipulations via fear and guilt) as well as justifying and excusing away disturbing things, as well as having little mercy. For all of those who do these things, I certainly hope for all their sakes that there isn’t something that will hold them accountable for all of their lies and damages done to others.

Unity of Mankind said:
So are you saying we should have a choice of being born or not before we are even born? What you leave out is a real God speaking through Prophets. What truths they bring forth are either valid or not. The fact that you were not consulted about how you came to be created strikes me as more than a little absurd.

What would be very absurd is being created in various different ways, various different conditionings and circumstances, given all sorts of things, deficiencies never asked for.... and then being held accountable for it all.

One atheist’s idea on how to prevent evil

Outstanding Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Outstanding Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Outstanding Member

Veteran Member

Outstanding Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Skanky Old Mongrel!

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Skanky Old Mongrel!

Active Member