Posts by slimboyfat

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

I know of no logical way to exclude this possibility, therefore I do not think the existence of unicorns has been disproved.

This is a poor response because it is the atheist argument which is making the presumption in this case. What is being claimed here is that the inability of humans to find a solution to the problem of evil therefore disproves the existence of the God of the Bible. When actually there are two reasonable explanations for humans not finding a solution to any given problem:

1. No solution exists.

2. A solution exists but we have not yet, or may never find it.

It is only husbris, or wishful thinking, that says 1 must be true and 2 cannot be the explanation.

Unless you know some good reason why 1 must be true and 2 can definitely be discounted.

I am curious if there are any good arguments for this.

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

What I said:

I know of no logical way to exclude this possibility, [a solution to the problem of evil we don't understand] therefore I do not think the God of the Bible has been disproved.

What Cofty said in the earlier thread he quoted:

It is my opinion that natural evil proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the god of christians, the god of Jesus does not exist.

Cofty in this thread:

WMy argument is not that suffering is incompatible with the existence of god.

Who is guilty of misrepresentation? I knew that your claimed "proof" only extended to the God of the Bible, that's why I worded my response in exactly those terms, confining it to the "Christian God" and the "God of the Bible".

So have you changed your mind, and no longer think the problem of evil disproves the God of the Bible? Or if you stand by the claim, that the Christian God is disproved, then how do you answer my question above?

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

It's atheists who are making the positive claim, if they say that, because God's goodness and almightiness seem irreconcilable to us humans, therefore they are reconcilable in reality, and therefore there must be no Chrustian God.

What is the basis for making the human mind the measure for what can exist in the universe in this way? Since there are certainly things about reality that humans can't understand, on what basis do atheists claim that a solution to the problem of evil cannot be one of the things we don't understand?

Notice I am not saying that God necessarily does exist or that there is a solution to the problem of evil. Cofty has claimed that the problem of evil proves that the God of the Bible does not exist. But in order for that "proof" to stand you would need to exclude the possibility that a solution to the problem of evil exists that humans don't or can't understand it.

I know of no logical way to exclude this possibility, therefore I do not think the God of the Bible has been disproved.

10

Revealing the wt "translators" now that gb are all over the place?

by carla in

back when me & my jw were still discussing anything jw related we had numerous discussions about just who the translators of the wt's bible were.

(i knew, thanks to this site and others like it) the answer was usually something to the effect that they (the wt) didn't want to give 'honor' to mere men by revealing who they were and what their education was.

now that the gb are all over the place, youtube, etc... why not reveal the 'translators' and their educational background?

slimboyfat

Because they are dead and can't give permission now.

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

I have read the three posts quoted. I can't find a response to my question. If there is one a simple statement of it would suffice rather than sending to read lots of old posts looking for an answer that isn't there.

The question is:

What is the logical basis for ruling out the possibility that there may be a solution to the problem of evil that humans either don't or are not able to understand?

There are various aspects of reality that the human mind is not able to grasp. We are not equipped to conceptualise more than three dimensions for example, although we theorise that many more exist. This is surely only the tip of the ice berg in terms of what exists in the universe that we are not able to grasp.

So why should the inability of the human mind to conceive a solution to the problem of evil be proof that no solution exists?

I am interested to know what an atheist response to this is, beyond mere sneering.

4

Using Pokemon Go to spread apostasy!

by slimboyfat in

i tried to post this yesterday but the picture must have been too big.

i don't know how to choose a smaller option.,.

anyway, for any pokemon go players here: i noticed there is a pokemon go gym in the city right next to the where jws have their trolleys.

slimboyfat

Ach, my wee brother pointed out, renamed Pokemon are only viewed as renamed by yourself in gyms, so it does t work. Doh!

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

Lots of problems of definition there John.

When you say "no animal" can conceive infinity you are assuming that humans are not animals, and you are drawing a distinction that needs to be proved rather than simply asserted.

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

Like I said above, given suffering in the world, and our inability to reconcile that with a loving God, it seems to me there are two possibilities with respect to an almighty, loving God.

1. Suffering shows there is no amighty, loving God.

2. God is both almighty and loving but the human mind is not equipped to understand how this is possible in a world with suffering.

Can anyone tell me any logical reason why the first must be true and the second cannot be true? I am really interested to know if there is a good atheist reply to this, involving more than simply name calling and rhetoric.

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

Then the god of Jesus is a delusion and theism retreats into esoteric bullshit masquerading as sophisticated theology.

How does that follow? The New Testament describes God as beyond human understanding.

I suggested there may be a solution to the problem of evil that humans either don't know yet or are not able to understand. Is this really the best reply you've got? "Esoteric bullshit masquerading as sophisticated theology"? That's just rhetoric, not an argument.

couldn't this have been a great thread with people discussing what they think reality is and then offering what gives life purpose for them personally

Yes it could but SBF failed to deliver on his OP. He ended up waffling something vague about some Scottish poet. Then he spent a couple of pages criticising a book he has never read.

What a strange comment. The poetry was precisely about finding meaning: "larks for no reason but themselves". And I have read some of the book, watched the talk, and read his other books, and given reasons for my objections. When are you going to read a book on pragmatism or postructuralism before dismissing them?

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

John Mann would it have been impossible for God to create a world with free will, but without suffering? If you say that would be impossible it does seem to set a limit on God. As if the universe consists of laws which have priority and constrain God's action. That's one reason I don't like the free will argument.

For me an answer to problem of evil is that there may be an answer we don't know yet or that we can't understand. There is far too little humility in discussion of these issues. Some atheists seem to have such supreme confidence in the human mind, or their own minds in particular, that if they can't see an answer to the problem of evil that therefore means there is no answer. How arrogant is that?

We can readily accept that a dog can't do calculus, most of us don't understand quantum mechanics, and our brains are not designed to think in more than three dimensions. Yet when it comes to whether a supreme being might know something about reality and the nature of evil that we don't understand, the idea is dismissed out of hand. Why?