What Could God do about Evil?

by Guest Fri Jan 29, 2016 9:54 am

First topic message reminder :

My post “Evil: Still no Good Answers” has provoked a lively discussion with over 200 comments. Theistic commentators naturally want to argue that there are indeed plausible reasons for God to permit evil, even evils of the magnitude, extent, and variety that we find in the actual world. A common theme of these replies is to demand that those who pose atheological arguments from evil must state realistic alternatives. How, specifically, might God have eliminated or alleviated the moral or natural evil of the world? It is easy enough, they imply, to bemoan the world’s evils, but if this complaint is to have substance, if it is to be more than a cri de coeur, then there has to be some plausible account of just how the world could have had less evil without also eliminating the greatest goods.

It is the case that evils and goods are connected in intricate ways so that some goods, indeed, some of the most important ones can only arise in the face of evils, and eliminating those evils would also cost us the related goods. For instance, it is easy to imagine a universe that would be a hedonistic paradise with no travail, hardship, or challenge and with well-fed, healthy creatures living lives of ease and never having a pain or enduring a want that is not instantly gratified. But such a life would only be a sort of Brave New World of self-indulgence and selfishness populated by lazy sybarites who dream nothing, achieve nothing, have no deep thoughts or feelings, and experience no great triumphs. A world with no pains, frustrations, or heartbreak, where a comfortable life requires no effort and nothing bad ever happens to anyone would also be a world in which nothing would matter, there would be no greatness or nobility, and everyone would be an over privileged, spoiled, useless nonentity (think the “affluenza” teen).

- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2016/01/20/what-could-god-do-about-evil/#sthash.4xz104OS.dpuf

Plenty more to read on the link

by Guest Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:49 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:A lot of people object to religious people trying to "convert" them, but if an atheist tries to convert a religious person, that seems to be OK. Stardesk hasn't been talking about the ways in which religion can harm others, he just seems to object to anyone merely having religious faith, and I don't know why it bothers him so much.

Then you are saying we should scrap the whole education system, based on some form of objection.
I have no objection to people influencing others if its dine for good.
I have no call to ban any beliefs or means to convert unless it effects children, when they are taught hate

Stardesk has been so over the top fair with you that your excuses now are utterly pathetic

Now the question is Rags, if you are strong in faith. As why I would you even be concerned or anti if you were strong in faith over challengers to your faith.
Only through doubt in your faith would cause you concern

by Raggamuffin Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:51 pm

It's very strange that Didge keeps answering on behalf of Stardesk ...

by Guest Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:53 pm

You know when the Aussie has lost the ploy as he things giving a red is him stamping his authority lol ha ha ha

See you later Veya, grow the fuck up there is a good little boy

by Guest Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:54 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:It's very strange that Didge keeps answering on behalf of Stardesk ...

You mean its only strange you offer up excuses to avoid my points which renders yours moot.

That would be the more telling point at your attempt to deflect

by Guest Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:55 pm

Anyway Rags my points still stand and either way, they are not going away anywhere

All the best

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:55 pm

Didge wrote:Still, the usual crap from Veya

He cannot reason against my views just tiries to deligitimise me

lol

Poor boy

So thanks for all your bollocks Veya, what you failed to do is as always is being to address my points

Why I have minus respect for someone as dumb as you

A person of reason would not do as you do and look for excuses but raeason the points made, not the poster

That is how I know I easily flaw your views

Suck it up bucko

And any abuse after this from you just proves me further right

See ya later little boy lo

Both myself and HT have pointed out that according to Science We, as in the entire of humanity, know so little about the universe that Your assertions are ridiculous.

what more do you want? that is your points addressed
And As Stardesk Clearly pointed out too IF god exists and man is made in his image than that god is chaotic just as man is. If you cannot follow that logic than why do you keep posting?

To give the slightest validity to your statemtns you need to Prove you know and you cant because you dont cause no one does.
Stop pretending god spoke to you and told you everything...

by Raggamuffin Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:58 pm

Didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:It's very strange that Didge keeps answering on behalf of Stardesk ...

You mean its only strange you offer up excuses to avoid my points which renders yours moot.

That would be the more telling point at your attempt to deflect

Didge, I've read your opinions on this subject a thousand times, and there's really nothing more you can say. I was asking Stardesk a specific question. He doesn't need you to answer for him - or does he?

by Guest Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:00 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Didge wrote:

You mean its only strange you offer up excuses to avoid my points which renders yours moot.

That would be the more telling point at your attempt to deflect

Didge, I've read your opinions on this subject a thousand times, and there's really nothing more you can say. I was asking Stardesk a specific question. He doesn't need you to answer for him - or does he?

Here is what the above translates as

Copout
Copout
Copout
Deflection
Copout

Tough shit on me replying to youy

by Raggamuffin Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:04 am

Didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge, I've read your opinions on this subject a thousand times, and there's really nothing more you can say. I was asking Stardesk a specific question. He doesn't need you to answer for him - or does he?

Here is what the above translates as

Copout
Copout
Copout
Deflection
Copout

Tough shit on me replying to youy

You can reply all you like, but you can't force me to address whatever insults you're throwing around, or whatever points you're raising (yet again). I can ignore your posts if you prefer. Pestering me won't get you anywhere, and replying on behalf of someone else won't help because it's not you I'm asking, and you're not a mind reader.

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:04 am

Didge wrote:You know when the Aussie has lost the ploy as he things giving a red is him stamping his authority lol ha ha ha

See you later Veya, grow the fuck up there is a good little boy

Didge
Anyone can read and see you have not post a single unaddressed point in the is entire thread Just like every other thread on theology if everyone doesn’t agree with whatever you read but never understood you just keep posting the same crappy line about not addressing your points even though you never address anyone’s point and most of time, Like this thread, You have not even made any valid points that are not addressed immediately. in this case by Multiple posters

And you have been warned not to uses sexualized insults already. You are lucky raggs is such a good Christian that she turns the other cheek
grin angel

by Raggamuffin Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:05 am

Didge never addresses anyone's points, except to say they're wrong. It becomes rather tiresome and boring.

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:11 am

Raggamuffin wrote:Didge never addresses anyone's points, except to say they're wrong. It becomes rather tiresome and boring.

I have to agree he is more fundamentalist than many fundamentalists

his 'crusader' Avatar is quite accurate Rolling Eyes

didge personal crusade to spread "hate and ignorance about the universe"

I find it Ironic that he hates Abrahamism So much and goes on and on about Wahhabis is Pure evil Because it tries to force it's world view on everyone else.... and proceed to do the same..

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:49 am

lets see IF didge can understand how Irrelvant his opinon is

What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 XoCi6YY

by veya_victaous Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:12 am

Let see if Didge can Understand that the Crow in this comic FULLY Addresses ALL his points in a single statement

What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 Jb7YSS4

What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 Jb7YSS4

by Guest Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:48 am

Raggamuffin wrote:Didge never addresses anyone's points, except to say they're wrong. It becomes rather tiresome and boring.

lol is that why you have been unable to address mine with idiotic deflections having the forum racist clown back you up

Score on that front love

As to the childish idiotic pictures that Veya uses, no they do not answer why religion is problematic when it is believed in the literal sense and where there is an absurd belief in absolute morals. They teach a religious racism, which deems non-believers as inferior. That the deity promotes hate and vengeance over love. That the day is insecure and suffers worse emotions than many humans do. Not exactly the sign of something all intelligent that would not be plagued by emotions.
How many more times does this have to explained to the imbecile before this sinks in and why for over 2,000 years millions have suffered because of this

So to Veya to challenge things of hate, is to be hateful

What a backward imbecilic yet again lol of which he does not lay such a charge at many others who share the same views

As usual the regressive live up to their name, they cannot debate the points.

by Guest Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:50 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Didge wrote:

Here is what the above translates as

Copout
Copout
Copout
Deflection
Copout

Tough shit on me replying to youy

You can reply all you like, but you can't force me to address whatever insults you're throwing around, or whatever points you're raising (yet again). I can ignore your posts if you prefer. Pestering me won't get you anywhere, and replying on behalf of someone else won't help because it's not you I'm asking, and you're not a mind reader.

Well you simply keep replying Rags, which furthers proves not only are you quite the simpleton, but you clearly must lack faith also. As again a person strong in faith do not feel threatened or challenged simply by questions on their religion, unless they believe their is truth to them and like I say only doubt creates that
So I am happy either way if you do not answer and just offer up excuses as its shows you to be emphatically wrong. and you do that all down to your own choosing

by Raggamuffin Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:04 am

Didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

You can reply all you like, but you can't force me to address whatever insults you're throwing around, or whatever points you're raising (yet again). I can ignore your posts if you prefer. Pestering me won't get you anywhere, and replying on behalf of someone else won't help because it's not you I'm asking, and you're not a mind reader.

Well you simply keep replying Rags, which furthers proves not only are you quite the simpleton, but you clearly must lack faith also. As again a person strong in faith do not feel threatened or challenged simply by questions on their religion, unless they believe their is truth to them and like I say only doubt creates that
So I am happy either way if you do not answer and just offer up excuses as its shows you to be emphatically wrong. and you do that all down to your own choosing

That's a good example of you saying the same thing a thousand times. You repeat yourself all the time and think that if you say something often enough you can bludgeon someone into agreeing with you. You'll only make yourself angry and lose your temper, so you're just hurting yourself.

by Guest Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:51 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Didge wrote:

Well you simply keep replying Rags, which furthers proves not only are you quite the simpleton, but you clearly must lack faith also. As again a person strong in faith do not feel threatened or challenged simply by questions on their religion, unless they believe their is truth to them and like I say only doubt creates that
So I am happy either way if you do not answer and just offer up excuses as its shows you to be emphatically wrong. and you do that all down to your own choosing

That's a good example of you saying the same thing a thousand times. You repeat yourself all the time and think that if you say something often enough you can bludgeon someone into agreeing with you. You'll only make yourself angry and lose your temper, so you're just hurting yourself.

lol look Rags, why not just admit that for one you are way over sensitive discussion your religion, which again is another fundamental problem with religion. Two that you have to accept that being are going to be very critical of religions especially the Abrahamic faiths, when what they teach is based on bad teachings. So throwing in inane and quite frankly poor attempts to goad emotively further proves you have nothing to counter my points, which leads to one last thing you need to be able to start doing in life. Recognize you do not know all the answers to points raised and even more recognize when you are wrong

by stardesk Fri Feb 12, 2016 3:16 pm

Raggy, I think it was you earlier who said you asked me questions which I haven't answered. please, ask me whatever you want and I'll try to answer it honestly and specifically. OK? Over to you.

Picking up on something something Veya said earlier about whether I believed in space, the universe etc, Veya may I ask you whether you believe in the following:

ABOMINAL SNOWMAN.
ALIENS (visiting Earth).
BIG FOOT.
FLAT EARTH.
LOCH NESS MONSTER.
RAINBOW SERPENT.
SASQUATCH.
SUN ROTATES ROUND THE EARTH.

??? Over to you.

by Raggamuffin Fri Feb 12, 2016 3:23 pm

Stardesk, I've asked you the same question a couple of times, and you just evade it, so I won't bother to waste any more time.

by eddie Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:14 pm

stardesk wrote:Raggy, I think it was you earlier who said you asked me questions which I haven't answered. please, ask me whatever you want and I'll try to answer it honestly and specifically. OK? Over to you.

Picking up on something something Veya said earlier about whether I believed in space, the universe etc, Veya may I ask you whether you believe in the following:

ABOMINAL SNOWMAN.
ALIENS (visiting Earth).
BIG FOOT.
FLAT EARTH.
LOCH NESS MONSTER.
RAINBOW SERPENT.
SASQUATCH.
SUN ROTATES ROUND THE EARTH.

??? Over to you.

You cannot say that none of these things exist though, can you?
You cannot say, with absolute certainty beyond any doubt, that none of those things are or are not, true.

If scientists announced tomorrow that there was a Sasquatch and that they'd photographed him, and it was on the news and all over the telegraph newspaper.....you'd believe it.

by Guest Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:57 pm

eddie wrote:
stardesk wrote:Raggy, I think it was you earlier who said you asked me questions which I haven't answered. please, ask me whatever you want and I'll try to answer it honestly and specifically. OK? Over to you.

Picking up on something something Veya said earlier about whether I believed in space, the universe etc, Veya may I ask you whether you believe in the following:

ABOMINAL SNOWMAN.
ALIENS (visiting Earth).
BIG FOOT.
FLAT EARTH.
LOCH NESS MONSTER.
RAINBOW SERPENT.
SASQUATCH.
SUN ROTATES ROUND THE EARTH.

??? Over to you.

You cannot say that none of these things exist though, can you?
You cannot say, with absolute certainty beyond any doubt, that none of those things are or are not, true.

If scientists announced tomorrow that there was a Sasquatch and that they'd photographed him, and it was on the news and all over the telegraph newspaper.....you'd believe it.

He does not even have to say, as he is not claiming they exist.
Proof of existence must be provided by those who believe, as Stardesk does not have to disprove something which nobody has proved exists.

Well if scientists did that, then they would have proof then, that Susquatch exists

by stardesk Fri Feb 12, 2016 8:42 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:Quoting Raggy: 'Stardesk, I've asked you the same question a couple of times, and you just evade it, so I won't bother to waste any more time.'

Raggy, stop side-stepping. Ask any question you like, I'm not afraid to answer you.

Eddie, if there was proof that a Fairy lived at the bottom of my garden I'd believe it, but until there's proof I'll leave it to those people who want to believe it, like faith and god etc. It's all a question of what you want to believe given the absence of proof.

by eddie Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:13 pm

stardesk wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Quoting Raggy: 'Stardesk, I've asked you the same question a couple of times, and you just evade it, so I won't bother to waste any more time.'

Raggy, stop side-stepping. Ask any question you like, I'm not afraid to answer you.

Eddie, if there was proof that a Fairy lived at the bottom of my garden I'd believe it, but until there's proof I'll leave it to those people who want to believe it, like faith and god etc. It's all a question of what you want to believe given the absence of proof.

What proof would you need?
Because lots of people claim to have seen them! They have photographs.
So....isn't that proof?
Or does it matter WHO it is?

So WHOM do you need to have seen one, to believe it...?

by Eilzel Sat Feb 13, 2016 12:19 am

Eds I appreciate your point on 'who' provides the proof, but aren't you really arguing for the sake of it?

If the was a loch ness monster, given the relative size of loch ness, we would know.

If there really were fairies, its fair to say more people would have more photographs, especially in the age of smartphones.

If there was a flat earth then we couldn't fly around the entire globe, yet we can.

You cannot always cite an absense of evidence 'either way' as raising the possibility of something's existence.

Do you believe there is an invisible teapot floating around Mars? No? Why not you have no proof. Crazy John tried to kill his neighbour because god told him his neighbour was the next Hitler. Don't believe him? How can you know?

There comes a point when absense of evidence is far more suggestive that the reason for that lack evidence IS lack of existence. Always implying the chances both was are pretty much 50/50 is disingenuous and willingly defying the way we learn things.

by HoratioTarr Sat Feb 13, 2016 12:24 am

[quote="Didge"][quote="HoratioTarr"][quote="stardesk"]Horatio, I think your response to Didge is a bit over the top, all we're trying to do is have a debate about the bona-fides of god and whether he really exists and, if he does, then why does he permit, and even encouraged, evilness. If you believe in god then give your reasons and try to prove his existance.

.[/quote]

BTW, do you think calling someone a c.u.n.t. is having an intelligent debate?[/quote]

No its not an intelligence response, its an angry response to allowing myself to be come emotionally compromised of which I myself an only to blame, but hey, please specify, on where I have used an offensive word whilst ignoring countless others to make some rather insignificant point.

All it seems you are doing is trying to stir one way or the other, so how about you actually inject some input into the debate, rather than trying to instead be no more than a pathetic little shit stirrer.

Now If I am wrong please forgive my abusive nature, but quite frankly as you have added zero to the debate so far, I will have to just simple conclude you only jumped on here to be an inane shit stirring plonker

Abuse is subjective and when any reason has left the debate, tempers flair up, but I am sure you are well of aware of that when you debate elsewhere.

Now anything else, or would you like to actually contribute to the thread other than rendering your own replies even worse and poorer than abuse itself?[/quote]

You handle criticism poorly, don't you? Well done for not using the C word though. lol!

If you call cut and pasting reams of other people's words and chucking profanities around like a madwoman slings shite, then no, I haven't contributed. However, I have put forth my opinion on the matter of God and shall continue to do so where I see fit.

by Guest Sat Feb 13, 2016 2:33 am

Well that just gave the game away as to you not being new at all here, which means you have track record, which means no doubt you are an inane immature child Horatio who goes by a different user name lol

Your opinion was worth jack shit like the rest of your posts so far on this thread, because you set out with an agenda. Not to debate but disrupt and derail, blatantly ignoring others being abusive, which led to my abusive post. That type of debating has ownership with the far right and regressive lef. You thus choose to instigate and incite trouble. It was very easy to expose you and very easy after what you gave away in your sentence.

lol and you thought you were being clever.
You have to age mentally a few decades to get to that level

lol!

by HoratioTarr Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:04 pm

[quote="Didge"]Well that just gave the game away as to you not being new at all here, which means you have track record, which means no doubt you are an inane immature child Horatio who goes by a different user name lol

Your opinion was worth jack shit like the rest of your posts so far on this thread, because you set out with an agenda. Not to debate but disrupt and derail, blatantly ignoring others being abusive, which led to my abusive post. That type of debating has ownership with the far right and regressive lef. You thus choose to instigate and incite trouble. It was very easy to expose you and very easy after what you gave away in your sentence.

lol and you thought you were being clever.
You have to age mentally a few decades to get to that level

lol!

[/quote]

Does one have to be new here then, in order for you to be civil?

by Guest Sun Feb 14, 2016 12:37 am

lol and still talking about me and zero on the debate, proving my point.

As to civility, maybe next time you will ponder that yourself before jumping in here to disrupt..

Cheers

by Guest Sun Feb 14, 2016 12:41 am

Have to say as should have place this here as its very relevant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y201QzDdzbg

by veya_victaous Sun Feb 14, 2016 1:18 am

stardesk wrote:Raggy, I think it was you earlier who said you asked me questions which I haven't answered. please, ask me whatever you want and I'll try to answer it honestly and specifically. OK? Over to you.

Picking up on something something Veya said earlier about whether I believed in space, the universe etc, Veya may I ask you whether you believe in the following:

ABOMINAL SNOWMAN. Maybe historical reference to Neanderthals, unlikely to still exist
ALIENS (visiting Earth). Don't know possible micro biological life on asteroids etc, Life on earth could be a product of Panspermia
BIG FOOT. Maybe historical reference to Neanderthals, unlikely to still exist
FLAT EARTH. No
LOCH NESS MONSTER. Possible but very unlikely
SASQUATCH. Maybe historical reference to Neanderthals, unlikely to still exist
SUN ROTATES ROUND THE EARTH. no

??? Over to you.

RAINBOW SERPENT.
As a concept within the deeper complexity of the the 'dreaming' yes, all can exist, since it is not of this dimension to begin with. The Story starts "in the time before reality existed" much like the star wars intro, the plausibility comes from the impossibility to compare to our current existence.

by veya_victaous Sun Feb 14, 2016 1:24 am

@didge
if you fight 'mindless hate' with 'mindless hate' then there is no less 'mindless hate' in the world
What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 3893789544

by Guest Sun Feb 14, 2016 1:36 am

Well it would help if you stopped stating views of others posters which are absolutely wrong
Which follows on from a conversation with Ben this morning

I do not use hate to challenge bad beliefs and challenging beliefs through criticism is not hate either. So I do not use hate and have no need to promote hate, as I have always backed people being treated equally under the eyes of the law, not matter their beliefs

So here is what I said

!st Post made:

Biggest load of drivel ever and fails to speak on what is more relevant, and that being anti-Muslim bigotry, as that fundamentally effects people. She spoke about Terry Jones and how both Christianity and Islam taught a message of peace and love. What she omitted from this, is that this love and peace only benefits the believers and not the non-believers. So both religions teach a selective peace and love. Her view to protect Islam from criticism is simply wrong, as we can challenge any belief and have done so throughout many centuries to obtain equality and progression. So whilst she is right to condemn Terry Jones, of which I back her stance on, her message was trying to censure and deny the right for people to be critical of a belief. When she should have centered on Muslims as people, to be treated equally as one with society.

Second Post

Indeed, and another problem is how religions have and still do have sought through laws to criminalize criticism of their faiths. It still happens in Muslim majority countries. This is a huge problem This is a problem not only with a literal belief system, but one that also proclaims to have been the last message given. Now in the west on the other hand Muslim officials have been proposing countless measures and to even continue to pressure the UN to ratify making criticism of Islam as part of there defamation of religious resolution. This just further provides ammunition to those of the far right. So Muslims need to fundamentally understand in this day and age anyone can be critical of beliefs. If they did this, the far Right lose their most powerful propaganda weapon. The Quran deemed to be literally the word of Allah. So Muslims by their beliefs are further creating problems, where they have no right to as they have tried to make criticism of Isalm part of the defamation of religion resolution

So there is a two edged sword here, being fueled by the Far Right and Muslims and hence a separation between Islamophobia and anti-Muslim bigotry is required. So acts like this by the Muslim authorities do no favours to the vast majority of Muslims on this and denies them being individual. As by such actions and claims, both the Muslim authorities and the Far Right are classifying them as a group.

Again though Muslims, just like anyone else no matter their beliefs should be treated equally within the law

Third Post

She was dishonest though in who the love and peace is taught and directed at in both Christianity and Islam.
To only the believers themselves. That the deity is insecure, bitter, vengeful, hateful. That the love is only conditional through belief and love from the individual. Now what she should have spoken in regards to is where Muslims are discriminated against due to the belief system, the Quran, Muhammad, Allah etc. Now her faith automatically renders and would claim Islam to be wrong, because she is a Christian. So in order for her to simply believe, it cannot allow for accepting religiously Islam as the word of God. All she did was go off ground zero, hate of Islam, criticism of Islam, Terry Jones, but not how to actually combat the problems by stating herself that criticism of any belief is not a crime or to be viewed as wrong. She instead was defending the religion from criticism. So she failed at the first hurdle, as to tackle problems like anti-Muslim hatred. You need to understand what is classed as anti-Muslim hatred. And criticism of Islam is not anti-Muslim hatred. So she is backing a view to invent 1.5 billion victims through just criticism of Islam.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t13985-for-those-of-you-who-are-biggoted-against-islam-let-a-lady-vicar-really-explain-it-to-you

by veya_victaous Sun Feb 14, 2016 1:49 am

eddie wrote:
stardesk wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Quoting Raggy: 'Stardesk, I've asked you the same question a couple of times, and you just evade it, so I won't bother to waste any more time.'

Raggy, stop side-stepping. Ask any question you like, I'm not afraid to answer you.

Eddie, if there was proof that a Fairy lived at the bottom of my garden I'd believe it, but until there's proof I'll leave it to those people who want to believe it, like faith and god etc. It's all a question of what you want to believe given the absence of proof.

What proof would you need?
Because lots of people claim to have seen them! They have photographs.
So....isn't that proof?
Or does it matter WHO it is?

So WHOM do you need to have seen one, to believe it...?

this is often my point but from the other side, it is repeatably of results that makes something 'true'. something like 'events' are really just perspectives and can never be confirmed 'true' by the scientific definition.
thus ideas of good or bad are meaningless when asking about 'truth' since it is merely a perspective, no matter how commonly held.

Stardesks Correct in saying the god of the bible is incorrect, but to use his example of fairies well first he has to define what a fairy is. Unlike the Abrahamist god they are a much more poorly defined concept, what attributes does he expect to find to call something a fairy? and if he has never seen one and is 'unsure' of there existence why does he expect to find those attributes?

@stardesk
as you can see the same logic can be applied to gods once you discard the Abrahamist definition as it is already deemed untrue, As I am 'unsure' of gods existence how can i define the attributes, that define what it is to be a god?
Science and logic and reason close the door on the biblical god because the definition it provides is untrue. but from sciences perspective, if it has never found one to define, then it's state is 'currently undefined' Wink

Basically, if you are expecting to find the attitudes as defined in the bible you wont and that also implies you still believe the bible is true.. which i don't so I wont use it to define the concept of 'gods' What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 202592697

What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 202592697

by stardesk Sun Feb 14, 2016 9:04 pm

Hello Veya. Thanks for your posting above. First, the Fairies. As far as I know there is only one photo which was supposed to be of fairies at the bottom of a garden, taken by 2 young sisters, many years ago. It must have been about 50/60 years back. I don't know of any others.

Neanderthal Man might be extinct as a species of Human in their own right, but apparently we Homo Sapiens posses up to 5% of Neanderthal DNA.

Now, faith and especially the Bible. As I've said on countless occasions, Christianity and its many off-shoot sects base their beliefs on what they are taught from the Bible. Of course, like everything else, there has to be a starting point and that is Genesis. Some of the stories in Genesis are just fable and myths handed down, such as the Flood and the animals in the Ark. Cain building a city, and several other stories.

It is tales like that which help me to point out that Christianity and the belief in a loving father-god is wrong. For God has shown himself to be manifestly evil at times, as written in the Bible. It wasn't all Satan's fault as claimed by some sects.

As far as Satan is concerned, I don't believe he was evil, I'll explain that another time if you wish. Bye for now.

by Raggamuffin Sun Feb 14, 2016 9:25 pm

You can't say fairies don't exist - one dies every time someone says that. Sad

The Cottingley girls admitted they faked some of those fairies.

Here's an article about fairies in the garden, and some photos.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2596119/Away-fairies-University-lecturer-claims-photographed-real-life-tiny-tinkerbells-flying-air-British-countryside.html

by veya_victaous Sun Feb 14, 2016 9:40 pm

well there are the fairies of Ireland that the celts used to believe in and there are several through out Asia and the Mimi in Australia.
Across the global spanning thousands of years there has been beliefs of that nature

What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 B92d224d54a5f95026ffa597b48617f4

What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 B92d224d54a5f95026ffa597b48617f4

Not Saying they are true but... If we are talking about inter dimensional beings how could I be sure.

Pretty sure those photos are a long acknowledged hoax
What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 CottingleyFairies3_thumb

http://www.mamalisa.com/blog/two-girls-fooled-the-world-with-photos-of-fairies-including-the-author-of-sherlock-holmes/

by HoratioTarr Sun Feb 14, 2016 10:40 pm

veya_victaous wrote:well there are the fairies of Ireland that the celts used to believe in and there are several through out Asia and the Mimi in Australia.
Across the global spanning thousands of years there has been beliefs of that nature

Not Saying they are true but... If we are talking about inter dimensional beings how could I be sure.

Pretty sure those photos are a long acknowledged hoax

http://www.mamalisa.com/blog/two-girls-fooled-the-world-with-photos-of-fairies-including-the-author-of-sherlock-holmes/

It was easy to fake stuff years ago, simply by virtue of the fact that people were more gullible when it came to photographic effects.

by Guest Sun Feb 14, 2016 10:47 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:You can't say fairies don't exist - one dies every time someone says that.

The Cottingley girls admitted they faked some of those fairies.

Here's an article about fairies in the garden, and some photos.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2596119/Away-fairies-University-lecturer-claims-photographed-real-life-tiny-tinkerbells-flying-air-British-countryside.html

Mmmmmm.......

by Guest Sun Feb 14, 2016 10:50 pm

veya_victaous wrote:well there are the fairies of Ireland that the celts used to believe in and there are several through out Asia and the Mimi in Australia.
Across the global spanning thousands of years there has been beliefs of that nature

Not Saying they are true but... If we are talking about inter dimensional beings how could I be sure.

Pretty sure those photos are a long acknowledged hoax

http://www.mamalisa.com/blog/two-girls-fooled-the-world-with-photos-of-fairies-including-the-author-of-sherlock-holmes/

Double Mmmmmmm

by Guest Sun Feb 14, 2016 11:01 pm

well fairy`s ........ do they exist .....As an ex dungeon master/player i am familiar with many "fairy folk" and legends from goblin to "bunnyyip" i have killed them all it was the basis for the whole game world.

so maybe i am predisposed to accepting the possibility of such creatures i would like to think they are true ,because it would go along way to explaining something that happened in my childhood that is still as vivid today as it was 47 years ago

we humans don`t perceive very much and its limited to a very narrow spectrum we use machines to see other wavelength's maybe when we invent a dimensional shift detector we will be very surprised at what`s round us every day

by Eilzel Mon Feb 15, 2016 12:14 am

^^^Eds, I appreciate your point on 'who' provides the proof, but aren't you really arguing for the sake of it?

If the was a loch ness monster, given the relative size of loch ness, we would know.

If there really were fairies, its fair to say more people would have more photographs, especially in the age of smartphones.

If there was a flat earth then we couldn't fly around the entire globe, yet we can.

You cannot always cite an absense of evidence 'either way' as raising the possibility of something's existence.

Do you believe there is an invisible teapot floating around Mars? No? Why not you have no proof. Crazy John tried to kill his neighbour because god told him his neighbour was the next Hitler. Don't believe him? How can you know?

There comes a point when absense of evidence is far more suggestive that the reason for that lack evidence IS lack of existence. Always implying the chances both was are pretty much 50/50 is disingenuous and willingly defying the way we learn things.

by veya_victaous Mon Feb 15, 2016 12:41 am

korban dallas wrote:well fairy`s ........ do they exist .....As an ex dungeon master/player i am familiar with many "fairy folk" and legends from goblin to "bunnyyip" i have killed them all it was the basis for the whole game world.

so maybe i am predisposed to accepting the possibility of such creatures i would like to think they are true ,because it would go along way to explaining something that happened in my childhood that is still as vivid today as it was 47 years ago

we humans don`t perceive very much and its limited to a very narrow spectrum we use machines to see other wavelength's maybe when we invent a dimensional shift detector we will be very surprised at what`s round us every day

I think so too.
when you consider the small spectrum of light we can actually process, there is a lot that could be right there and we just cant see it.

Let alone once you get into the theoretical quantum physics of particle oscillation faster than the speed of light, entire dimensions could be sitting on/in each other just vibrating a different speeds so not 'contacting' each other

I think Spiritual awareness also requires one to understand you define your own reality, how much magic and mystery is in it is up to the individual.

by veya_victaous Mon Feb 15, 2016 3:50 am

High Fiving the dragon fairy

What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 68rhCcM

by stardesk Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:42 pm

Eilzel, quite right on absence of evidence doesn't prove the possibility of existance, otherwise this boils down to a personal desire/wish for something to exist, and that is the situation in which the belief in god comes in. Due to no concrete proof he/it boils down to a personal desire to fill a gap in one's reason and fulfilment in life.

'If I believe in him and worship him he will provide for me.' So, many would believe.

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:01 pm

@stardesk
Regarding Bigfoot Cool

What Could God do about Evil? - Page 3 ZgH7BiZ

by Guest Thu Feb 18, 2016 1:30 am

Didge wrote:My post “Evil: Still no Good Answers” has provoked a lively discussion with over 200 comments. Theistic commentators naturally want to argue that there are indeed plausible reasons for God to permit evil, even evils of the magnitude, extent, and variety that we find in the actual world. A common theme of these replies is to demand that those who pose atheological arguments from evil must state realistic alternatives. How, specifically, might God have eliminated or alleviated the moral or natural evil of the world? It is easy enough, they imply, to bemoan the world’s evils, but if this complaint is to have substance, if it is to be more than a cri de coeur, then there has to be some plausible account of just how the world could have had less evil without also eliminating the greatest goods.

It is the case that evils and goods are connected in intricate ways so that some goods, indeed, some of the most important ones can only arise in the face of evils, and eliminating those evils would also cost us the related goods. For instance, it is easy to imagine a universe that would be a hedonistic paradise with no travail, hardship, or challenge and with well-fed, healthy creatures living lives of ease and never having a pain or enduring a want that is not instantly gratified. But such a life would only be a sort of Brave New World of self-indulgence and selfishness populated by lazy sybarites who dream nothing, achieve nothing, have no deep thoughts or feelings, and experience no great triumphs. A world with no pains, frustrations, or heartbreak, where a comfortable life requires no effort and nothing bad ever happens to anyone would also be a world in which nothing would matter, there would be no greatness or nobility, and everyone would be an over privileged, spoiled, useless nonentity (think the “affluenza” teen).

- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2016/01/20/what-could-god-do-about-evil/#sthash.4xz104OS.dpuf

Plenty more to read on the link

Found your OP'd piece an interesting 'food 4 thought'; once I waded through the actual on point posts and skimmed over all of the hateful rhetoric --- I came to my own conclusion >>>

Without the counter balance of 'EVIL' then there would be no need for the 'GOD PROJECT'---one works hand-in-hand with the other! So the question of 'What Could God Do About Evil?'...when the very object has to be kept in play to benefit the need for CONTROL over the masses {regardless of the name of the faith} --- one doesn't work without the other!
And for further proof for my belief system in this regard; I've been working on a project {on another community forum} reading through all of the 300+ Saints listed on the RCC saints listing!
The very premise of using the heathen charms/idols/and pagan rituals were very useful for slowly and methodically turning a group of 'non-Christians' around to the RCC way of thinking.
Found this Saint that used this method {and quite efficiently too}

St. Augustine of Canterbury
St. Augustine of Canterbury is known as one of the most humane saints. He made mistakes throughout his ventures and failed in peacemaking attempts from time to time. Pope Gregory also warned him on more than one occasion that he was not doing as told.

Perseverance is the word that best describes St. Augustine of Canterbury because he was able to overcome a number of obstacles. Gradual advances amid struggle is what he can teach everyone. He is the Patron Saint of England and while he was told to destroy pagan sites and rituals, he instead used them to help convert people to Christianity, using those same pagan sites and symbols to become Christian ones.

In Christmas 597, he reportedly baptized thousands of subjects and dispatched monks to Rome to speak of what he did. Augustine was the founder of Christ Church, Canterbury, which is why he is now referred to as St. Augustine of Canterbury. http://www.catholicsaintmedals.com/St-Augustine-medal-medal.aspx

So 'EVIL' is a useful/needed tool; it's been the basis for scaring the Beee-Geezesrs out of humanity since before Jesus was just a twinkle in GODS eye!

by Guest Thu Feb 18, 2016 6:45 am

aspca4ever wrote:
Didge wrote:My post “Evil: Still no Good Answers” has provoked a lively discussion with over 200 comments. Theistic commentators naturally want to argue that there are indeed plausible reasons for God to permit evil, even evils of the magnitude, extent, and variety that we find in the actual world. A common theme of these replies is to demand that those who pose atheological arguments from evil must state realistic alternatives. How, specifically, might God have eliminated or alleviated the moral or natural evil of the world? It is easy enough, they imply, to bemoan the world’s evils, but if this complaint is to have substance, if it is to be more than a cri de coeur, then there has to be some plausible account of just how the world could have had less evil without also eliminating the greatest goods.

It is the case that evils and goods are connected in intricate ways so that some goods, indeed, some of the most important ones can only arise in the face of evils, and eliminating those evils would also cost us the related goods. For instance, it is easy to imagine a universe that would be a hedonistic paradise with no travail, hardship, or challenge and with well-fed, healthy creatures living lives of ease and never having a pain or enduring a want that is not instantly gratified. But such a life would only be a sort of Brave New World of self-indulgence and selfishness populated by lazy sybarites who dream nothing, achieve nothing, have no deep thoughts or feelings, and experience no great triumphs. A world with no pains, frustrations, or heartbreak, where a comfortable life requires no effort and nothing bad ever happens to anyone would also be a world in which nothing would matter, there would be no greatness or nobility, and everyone would be an over privileged, spoiled, useless nonentity (think the “affluenza” teen).

- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2016/01/20/what-could-god-do-about-evil/#sthash.4xz104OS.dpuf

Plenty more to read on the link

Found your OP'd piece an interesting 'food 4 thought'; once I waded through the actual on point posts and skimmed over all of the hateful rhetoric --- I came to my own conclusion >>>

Without the counter balance of 'EVIL' then there would be no need for the 'GOD PROJECT'---one works hand-in-hand with the other! So the question of 'What Could God Do About Evil?'...when the very object has to be kept in play to benefit the need for CONTROL over the masses {regardless of the name of the faith} --- one doesn't work without the other!
And for further proof for my belief system in this regard; I've been working on a project {on another community forum} reading through all of the 300+ Saints listed on the RCC saints listing!
The very premise of using the heathen charms/idols/and pagan rituals were very useful for slowly and methodically turning a group of 'non-Christians' around to the RCC way of thinking.
Found this Saint that used this method {and quite efficiently too}
St. Augustine of Canterbury
St. Augustine of Canterbury is known as one of the most humane saints. He made mistakes throughout his ventures and failed in peacemaking attempts from time to time. Pope Gregory also warned him on more than one occasion that he was not doing as told.

Perseverance is the word that best describes St. Augustine of Canterbury because he was able to overcome a number of obstacles. Gradual advances amid struggle is what he can teach everyone. He is the Patron Saint of England and while he was told to destroy pagan sites and rituals, he instead used them to help convert people to Christianity, using those same pagan sites and symbols to become Christian ones.

In Christmas 597, he reportedly baptized thousands of subjects and dispatched monks to Rome to speak of what he did. Augustine was the founder of Christ Church, Canterbury, which is why he is now referred to as St. Augustine of Canterbury. http://www.catholicsaintmedals.com/St-Augustine-medal-medal.aspx

So 'EVIL' is a useful/needed tool; it's been the basis for scaring the Beee-Geezesrs out of humanity since before Jesus was just a twinkle in GODS eye!

Usual hateful rhetoric?
lol show me where that was?
Then explain what evil is?

by Guest Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:39 am

There is no such thing as evil

evil is a concept
one that can be good or bad depending on you point of view and the situation at any given time

is killing one man to save a thousand evil ,killing is "evil "after all
or is letting a thousand die for one man evil, depends on the man you might say and thats where the point of view comes in

yes they are things we find apporant and disgusting and morally unacceptable and they shock us so much we call it evil the very highest on the bad scale,
but its not evil in the religious sense of the word its just what humans do to each other and other things ,in our case held against a western chart of what we consider badness and evil other have there own charts

Evil is just the extreme of good and bad and its fluid what might be evil one day isn`t necessary evil the next day

by Guest Thu Feb 18, 2016 11:01 am

Didge asked >>> Usual hateful rhetoric?
lol show me where that was?
Then explain what evil is?

No - No...what I stated was >>> Found your OP'd piece an interesting 'food 4 thought'; once I waded through the actual on point posts and skimmed over all of the hateful rhetoric

I should have typed "hateful rhetoric posts" ...but I'll claim the lateness of the day and mental fatigue as well.

Defining what my specific moral compass value for 'GOOD / EVIL' is as subjective as the time of day - how mentally well adjusted I might be given any one circumstance - or how well I am dealing with my pain factor for that instance and the issue of what am I viewing...is there an animal involved and is there human behaving badly!!!

Far to many variables IMHO-just give pat answers to - "Then Explain what evil is?" ...IOW's, EVIL can be applied to too many instantaneous/finite issues to carry a 'THIS IS EVIL TO ME' explanation.

by Sponsored content