What is the purpose of life? (page 31)

slimboyfat

Seriously? You watched that video and thought it was a good explanation?

Yes, that's why I posted it. Glad to clear that up.

His first point is an old as the hills and totally moronic. 'If God exists we would expect that many of his reasons for doing things are stuff we can't figure out.'

Well it's a point made by philosophers down the ages and which has underpinned the belief of billions of believers past and present. Majority opinion doesn't mean right opinion, of course, but the complete confidence with which a tiny minority of atheist true believers call the views of the vast majority of humans past and present "totally moronic", or "stupid or dishonest" displays no small degree of arrogance.

This pre-supposes that God is a being that will not communicate his reasons for doing things. But if such a being exists why should we bother to be interested in it?

A fair question, but this is a different question than God's existence. And it seems to ignore the fact that this is precisely how the Bible presents God. Romans 9 says that God made Pharaoh stubborn and obstinate and then punished him. Paul asks how God could act that way. His answer indicates that sometimes humans can't understand God's actions and are not in a position to demand an answer.

One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it,‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

We can figure things reasons God might have lots of the evil in the world - and he lists free will and a cause and effect universe. No we can't figure it out! Because why would a vastly intelligent being who can create life, the universe and everything not be able to set up things up so that they don't create such evils. Why did he create us with the ability to see evil and not create a universe that doesn't contain it?

I can't think of any good reason either. The point is not that we can give a good reason. The point is that there may be a good reason that we are not aware of. I can't understand why this distinction appears so difficult to grasp, or why the idea that human knowledge may be limited in this way is so unthinkable for some.

That's why the big bang and evolution makes more sense to me. I look at Parasitoids and ask myself, does that look like the work of vastly intelligent creator or the result of evolution? Because if they were created, that God is sick.

Well I don't see evolution and God as opposites. I have little time for creationism which I think is separate from the existence of God. I rate the chances of creationism being correct something less than 1%. Whether there may be a God or not, I don't know, at the moment maybe 25% or so.

SBF - I hope you get answers to your questions. You come across as a slightly tragic figure who has lost his JW faith and now just restlessly searching for meaning in life. I feel sorry for you.

I guess many are looking for answers, especially those who leave JWs. Whether you or I or anyone else is more "tragic" in that, I don't know how to judge. But the attempt to substitute actual argument with ad hominem psychobablle is pretty transparent.

slimboyfat

No you don't. It's no bold claim to say that a quarter of a million people not drowning in a tsunami is better than the deaths of all those men, women and children.

I agree with you, and I can think of no good excuse. The tsunami of 2004 was one of the key things that pushed me toward atheism. In particular I don't think free will or other explanations are satisfactory. But might there be some other explanation that we either don't know yet or are not able to grasp? I can't logically rule out that possibility. To say otherwise seems to give inordinate esteem to our own ability to know, understand and offer a final judgment upon the nature of the world and reality. Therefore, to me, the problem of evil makes it difficult to believe in a loving God, but it does not prove that he does not exist.

slimboyfat

I am glad I watched it because I doubt a better argument for theism exists, and yet the argument does not work in the case of the tsunami.
To argue there is a good reason to drown a quarter of a million men, women and infants is impossible. It requires contradicting Jesus about the definition of godly love.

That's not quite the argument. It's not making the positive claim that there is a good reason for evil. The point is that we cannot rule out the possibility that there may be a good reason that we are unaware of. Given that a supreme being would undoubtedly be unfathomably wiser than we are, and given that human knowledge and understanding is limited, I don't think it is unreasonable to allow for this possibility, even if it seems remote.

wizzstick

The point is that there may be a good reason that we are not aware of.

When God appears and tells us then let's all discuss the reason.

Until then forget about it.

wizzstick

But the attempt to substitute actual argument with ad hominem psychobablle is pretty transparent.

Transparent?

Of what?

cofty

The point is that we cannot rule out the possibility that there may be a good reason that we are unaware of.

Yes we can.

To argue there is a good reason to drown a quarter of a million men, women and infants contradicts specific statements Jesus made about the definition of godly love.

nicolaou

To say otherwise (that there could be no other explanation) seems to give inordinate esteem to our own ability to know, understand and offer a final judgment upon the nature of the world and reality.

Respectfully Slim', you're over analysing and not trusting yourself enough.

John_Mann

Gentlemen, I think we reached the point of balance in our shared knowledge about the discussion.

From this point is more a matter of choice (sbf) rather than being objectively right or wrong. Not in a relativistic sense but because we don't have more "fresh" (cofty) things about it. From now on our decisions upon the subject can be equated to decisions of our favorite colors.

I would like to summarise our main points and I accept corrections if I'm wrong.

1) Problem of natural evil proves God cannot exist. (cofty)

2) Problem of natural evil does not proves God cannot exist. And it also does not proves God causes evil. (JM and SBF)

3) If God exists, problem of evil proves God is a monster because He not just permits evil but He ultimately causes evil. (cofty and Nic)

4) If God doesn't exist we have the problem of absolute void producing the universe. (Sbf and JM)

5) Absolute void producing something/universe is not a problem. (Nic and cofty)

6) Ruling out God and accepting absolut void producing the universe requires a kind of an extraordinary knowledge that we don't possess. Therefore we can accept mystery. (SBF and JM)

7) Ruling out God and accepting absolut void producing the universe does not requires a kind of an extraordinary knowledge that we don't possess. Therefore we cannot accept mystery. (Nic and cofty)

8) Is possible to exist a justifying reason for the problem of evils (natural and man-made). The two main defences are: accepting total mystery and accepting the immortality of soul. (JM and SBF)

9) Right or wrong we will go back to the absolute void (oblivion) after our deaths. There's no possibility of afterlife in any sense imaginable. (cofty and Nic)

10) If we're right. There's the dreadful possibility of eternal Hell for us after death. So Pascal's wager must be considered. (JM)

11) With or without God the problem of evil persists. And there's no known solution even without God. (SBF and JM)

12) Ultimately we are total responsible for our own free decisions. Free will exists, at least in our internal intentions and imagination. (JM, Nic, SBF and cofty)

Ucantnome

The tsunami of 2004 was one of the key things that pushed me toward atheism.

Why did this and not someone getting stuck by lightning or another such incident, just the numbers or the suffering was worse?

John_Mann

I really enjoy discussions with atheists. Great thinkers.

I simply can't stomach "discussions" with pentecostals and their "where's written" at every word you say. Ironically everyone of them always brings "written commentaries" (litter-a-trash) along with the Bible. And "voices" speak to them what is not "written".

Atheism is totally valid for this kind of people. Atheism is a great system of thought to expose the Sola Scriptura heresy.

Thank you atheists and keep exposing these religions that are incompatible with rational thought and doesn't accept science (specially evolution).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Council_for_Dialogue_with_Non-Believers

What is the purpose of life?

Share this