The problem of evil

[amariselle]

Not it certainly does not require faith, you having questions that I can't answer doesn't mean I use faith. I don't even have an interest in answering a lot of those questions and I don't claim to have all the answers and neither does science. Science just makes an honest attempt to actually make sense with what we really know and it admits when it can't.

Science does not always readily admit when it could be wrong or is limited. It claims to have indisputable evidence as to the origin of life and the universe for example, and yet the very nature of science requires that something is reproducible and verifiable in a study or experiment. Yet, when science makes claims about the origin of life, the earth and the universe, it is making claims about things FAR beyond its reach.

Faith is the willful effort to believe something because you want to believe it, sometimes inspite of evidence that it's not true. I don't do that, but faith does and you use faith.

Exactly, science does this all the time. Just because you don't believe in God, does not mean you don't take many things on "faith."

No every single one of you cannot say the same, Christians regularly say that they do not understand, that they cannot trust their own understanding, that they cannot just do what they feel is right but that they have to submit to god only. That's not what I do. I stand by what I really believe is right, no matter what or who disagrees and my beliefs are enough for me.
My way does not make Hitler or Stalin right, my way just admits that my feelings and needs are all I have to base my morals own, I am just honest enough to admit that. Hitler was also very religious and regularly talked about god too, so he's not with me, he closer to your group. Him and Stalin actually acted a lot more like the bible god, killing anyone they didn't like or who did not support them.

Closer to "my group"? Do your research. Hitler killed many many Christians, as well as God's chosen people, the Jews. Basically Hitler killed anyone who didn't agree with him or anyone he deemed "unfit" or "undesirable." The only god Hitler served was himself.

You keep implying that morality doesn't exist without objectivity... and that's just not true.

It is absolutely true. If there is no objective standard, than there is no basic morality to hold to. Rather, in a completely subjective world, anything goes. I understand why you don't like that reality, but it is true nonetheless.

Whether he is a god or whether he created anything has no bearing on whether what he thinks or does is right or if what he claims is true. God can't commit crimes either, they would still be crimes and he would just become an evil god.

God creating us has absolute bearing on the true and objective reality of good and bad. God and His character are the absolute standard of right and wrong. He's God, not us.

 

[bhsmte]

Science does not always readily admit when it could be wrong or is limited. It claims to have indisputable evidence as to the origin of life and the universe for example, and yet the very nature of science requires that something is reproducible and verifiable in a study or experiment. Yet, when science makes claims about the origin of life, the earth and the universe, it is making claims about things FAR beyond its reach.

Do you realize, how much you depend on the discoveries of science each hour and each day of your life?

 

[amariselle]

Do you realize, how much you depend on the discoveries of science each hour and each day of your life?

I depend on science for this life only, not for my eternal hope and future and not for my salvation.

The dependence on science has also cost many people their lives, so what's your point? Science fails, Jesus does not.

 

[bhsmte]

I depend on science for this life only, not for my eternal hope and future and not for my salvation.

The dependence on science has also cost many people their lives, so what's your point? Science fails, Jesus does not.

This life is the only one anyone can demonstrate exists. If you want to believe in another life on faith, I have no problem with that, but you can not demonstrate this other life is real in any objective way.

So tell us, how has any dependence on science cost many people their lives?

And, has science been able to; cause many people to live a longer more healthy life and saved lives?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

It comes from us, that's why it's innate human goodness. It's the evolutionary need to survive, reproduce, protect our offspring and try to be happy.

Don't hurt me, Don't rape me, Don't steal my food, Don't hurt my children, I need to reproduce... these are very basic human needs that humans and organisms have all by their selves. But humans have always wondered were we came from and they don't know a way to prove that their own happiness is more important than another beings happiness, so they need to invoke a creator with moral authority in order to put those questions to rest and give them peace during their confusion.

But isn't this innate human goodness counterproductive to survival. Now I know there are some exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking animals in nature do not put their survival at risk in order to save the weak. If a mother bear or rodent is hungry enough, they will eat their own young. When times are desperate, even people resort to evil actions in order that their survival is ensured. So what evolutionary sense does "goodness" make to improve your survival?

 

[bhsmte]

But isn't this innate human goodness counterproductive to survival. Now I know there are some exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking animals in nature do not put their survival at risk in order to save the weak. If a mother bear or rodent is hungry enough, they will eat their own young. When times are desperate, even people resort to evil actions in order that their survival is ensured. So what evolutionary sense does "goodness" make to improve your survival?

Because we have evolved to be social creatures.

Survival of humans in the long term, is helped by aiding others.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Science does not always readily admit when it could be wrong or is limited. It claims to have indisputable evidence as to the origin of life and the universe for example, and yet the very nature of science requires that something is reproducible and verifiable in a study or experiment. Yet, when science makes claims about the origin of life, the earth and the universe, it is making claims about things FAR beyond its reach.

Give me an example of "science" claiming to have absolute answers to all of life's questions concerning our existence please. It doesn't, that's why scientists are still searching and discovering. Scientists sometimes speculate and sometimes have wellfounded theories and sometimes they find facts.

Exactly, science does this all the time. Just because you don't believe in God, does not mean you don't take many things on "faith."

No... it doesn't. Give me an example of a scientist who believes out of pure effort without any evidence.

Closer to "my group"? Do your research. Hitler killed many many Christians, as well as God's chosen people, the Jews. Basically Hitler killed anyone who didn't agree with him or anyone he deemed "unfit" or "undesirable." The only god Hitler served was himself.

Do YOUR research, Hitler claimed to be on a mission from god! He talked about Christ!

It is absolutely true. If there is no objective standard, than there is no basic morality to hold to. Rather, in a completely subjective world, anything goes. I understand why you don't like that reality, but it is true nonetheless.

It's not truth, you're just saying that and you don't even have any evidence to say it, I've told you over and over and over and over that I have a moral system I care about right and wrong and it's because of my feelings and has nothing to do with god. It doesn't matter that you don't think you could hold on to right and wrong without god... that makes YOU a sociopath not me.

God creating us has absolute bearing on the true and objective reality of good and bad. God and His character are the absolute standard of right and wrong. He's God, not us.

Actually who made who does not make that person right, that's why god can't rape murder and torture either, because those things are wrong. Might does not make right.

 

[bhsmte]

Give me an example of "science" claiming to have absolute answers to all of lifes questions concerning our existence please. It doesn't, thats why scientists are still searching and discovering. Scientists sometimes speculate and sometimes have wellfounded theories and sometimes they find facts.



No... it doesn't. Give me an example of a scientist believe out of pure effort without evidence.




Do YOUR research, Hitler claimed to be on a mission from god! He talked about Christ!



It's not truth, you're just saying that and you don't even have any evidence to say it, I've told you over and over and over and over that I have a moral system I care about right and wrong and it's because of my feelings and has nothing to do with god. It doesn't matter that you don't think you could hold on to right and wrong without god... that makes YOU a sociopath not me.

Nailed it!!!

 

[Hikarifuru]

But isn't this innate human goodness counterproductive to survival. Now I know there are some exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking animals in nature do not put their survival at risk in order to save the weak. If a mother bear or rodent is hungry enough, they will eat their own young. When times are desperate, even people resort to evil actions in order that their survival is ensured. So what evolutionary sense does "goodness" make to improve your survival?

Actually they do, cats and dogs have famously risked their well being to take care of their children and their owners. Not all creatures do good things obviously but it's a very basic thing that yes creatures do survive better if they help take care of their group.

 

[amariselle]

Give me an example of "science" claiming to have absolute answers to all of life's questions concerning our existence please. It doesn't, that's why scientists are still searching and discovering. Scientists sometimes speculate and sometimes have wellfounded theories and sometimes they find facts.

Scientists make such claims all the time. Their theories are taught as fact in every natural history museum, in zoos, in classrooms and in nature documentaries.

No... it doesn't. Give me an example of a scientist who believes out of pure effort without any evidence.

How about the origins of life? Science has not even come close to proving their theories regarding this, and yet they present them as absolute fact all the time.

Do YOUR research, Hitler claimed to be on a mission from god! He talked about Christ!

This is the problem with people who think Jesus told us to kill people, such people know NOTHING about what true Christianity is. Hitler was not obeying Jesus Christ in killing people, he was serving only himself and his own ideals, his own sense of right and wrong.

Plenty of people talk about Christ, that means absolutely nothing. The true test of a Christian is their obedience to Jesus, not their empty words.

I have done plenty of research into WWII and the Holocaust, thank you. You are one of the only people I have EVER heard make such outrageous claims about Hitler and the Nazis. They may have justified what they were doing by saying they were serving some kind of God, but it certainly wasn't Jesus.

It's not truth, you're just saying that and you don't even have any evidence to say it, I've told you over and over and over and over that I have a moral system I care about right and wrong and it's because of my feelings and has nothing to do with god. It doesn't matter that you don't think you could hold on to right and wrong without god... that makes YOU a sociopath not me.

Is this a serious argument? I'm a sociopath because I believe there are absolute, objective moral standards, like it's wrong to murder for instance? Sorry, but a sociopath would be someone who does horrific things and can justify them by saying morality is subjective. Your idea of morality and right and wrong allows for that, not mine.

Also, please be careful with your name calling and insults, such behaviour seriously undermines your credibility.

Actually who made who does not make that person right, that's why god can't rape murder and torture either, because those things are wrong. Might does not make right.

They are wrong because the are an affront to a righteous and holy God. Under your system of subjectivity however, they are not wrong, they are only one individual's personal choice, a choice no more good or bad than your own.

 

[bhsmte]

Scientists make such claims all the time. Their theories are taught as fact in every natural history museum, in zoos, in classrooms and in nature documentaries.



How about the origins of life? Science has not even come close to proving their theories regarding this, and yet they present them as absolute fact all the time.



This is the problem with people who think Jesus told us to kill people, such people know NOTHING about what true Christianity is. Hitler was not obeying Jesus Christ in killing people, he was serving only himself and his own ideals, his own sense of right and wrong.

Plenty of people talk about Christ, that means absolutely nothing. The true test of a Christian is their obedience to Jesus, not their empty words.

I have done plenty of research into WWII and the Holocaust, thank you. You are one of the only people I have EVER heard make such outrageous claims about Hitler and the Nazis. They may have justified what they were doing by saying they were serving some kind of God, but it certainly wasn't Jesus.



Is this a serious argument? I'm a sociopath because I believe there are absolute, objective moral standards, like it's wrong to murder for instance? Sorry, but a sociopath would be someone who does horrific things and can justify them by saying morality is subjective. Your idea of morality and right and wrong allows for that, not mine.

Also, please be careful with your name calling and insults, such behaviour seriously undermines your credibility.



They are wrong because the are an affront to a righteous and holy God. Under your system of subjectivity however, they are not wrong, they are only one individual's personal choice, a choice no more good or bad than your own.

Please provide examples of the above.

And specifically, when has science presented "absolute facts" in regards to the origin of life?

I will await these specific examples, from scientific sources.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Scientists make such claims all the time. Their theories are taught as fact in every natural history museum, in zoos, in classrooms and in nature documentaries.

Actually scientific theories are taught as scientific theories which by definition are extremely well tested verified and peer reviewed theories that are pretty much facts.... a common theory and a scientific theory are not the same thing. Gravity is a scientific theory.

How about the origins of life? Science has not even come close to proving their theories regarding this, and yet they present them as absolute fact all the time.

Give me an actual claim, not a "how about the origins of life?" You don't even know what theory you think you're talking about or what was actually said.

This is the problem with people who think Jesus told us to kill people, such people know NOTHING about what true Christianity is. Hitler was not obeying Jesus Christ in killing people, he was serving only himself and his own ideals, his own sense of right and wrong.

Plenty of people talk about Christ, that means absolutely nothing. The true test of a Christian is their obedience to Jesus, not their empty words.

I have done plenty of research into WWII and the Holocaust, thank you. You are one of the only people I have EVER heard make such outrageous claims about Hitler and the Nazis. They may have justified what they were doing by saying they were serving some kind of God, but it certainly wasn't Jesus.

That you don't think Hitler's actions are agreeable with Jesus' teachings is not relevant to whether or not Hitler thought he was serving Jesus. But seriously? Jesus talked about putting people in a fiery furnace and burning them alive, and that's kind of what Hitler did. Jesus said only the believers will survive, Hitler was making a superior race, Hitler said he served Christ. You just don't like it. Hitler killed anyone he didn't value or like.... THAT'S WHAT GOD DID ALL THROUGH THE BIBLE.

Is this a serious argument? I'm a sociopath because I believe there are absolute, objective moral standards, like it's wrong to murder for instance? Sorry, but a sociopath would be someone who does horrific things and can justify them by saying morality is subjective. Your idea of morality and right and wrong allows for that, not mine.

Also, please be careful with your name calling and insults, such behaviour seriously undermines your credibility.

No.... you would be a sociopath if you couldn't have a moral system without your god... and it's true. Me, I'll always have a moral system because it's mine. My moral system is greater than yours is, it doesn't even allow God to do what you think god does, it doesn't allow anyone to hurt anyone. You just put your head in the dirt and refuse to admit that I have a moral system.

They are wrong because the are an affront to a righteous and holy God. Under your system of subjectivity however, they are not wrong, they are only one individual's personal choice, a choice no more good or bad than your own.

Actually no, they are wrong BECAUSE THEY HURT PEOPLE!!!!! You think the only reason rape and murder are wrong is because they an affront to your god, how selfish and deluded could you possibly be? Morality is about the hurting people, not god's lovely beautiful aura.

 

[amariselle]

Please provide examples of the above.

And specifically, when has science presented "absolute facts" in regards to the origin of life?

I will await these specific examples, from scientific sources.

Wait, you don't think that all those pretty signs at museums and the information presented there is being presented as absolute fact? Or when you turn on a nature documentary and it talks about our common ancestor and how we are all related life-forms, that's not being presented as absolute fact? Interesting, because I never hear the word "maybe" in there anywhere. It seems scientists are 100% certain what they are claiming is true, and yet, they lack 100% verifiable evidence and proof for their claims.

 

[bhsmte]

Wait, you don't think that all those pretty signs at museums and the information presented there is being presented as absolute fact? Or when you turn on a nature documentary and it talks about our common ancestor and how we are all related life-forms, that's not being presented as absolute fact? Interesting, because I never hear the word "maybe" in there anywhere. It seems scientists are 100% certain what they are claiming is true, and yet, they lack 100% verifiable evidence and proof for their claims.

Please tell us, how the massive evidence for a common ancestor, makes claims about the "origins" of life itself.

It is becoming pretty clear, you don't understand the difference between the theory of evolution and the origins of life itself. The theory of evolution, makes no claim about the origins of life, only how life evolved.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Wait, you don't think that all those pretty signs at museums and the information presented there is being presented as absolute fact? Or when you turn on a nature documentary and it talks about our common ancestor and how we are all related life-forms, that's not being presented as absolute fact? Interesting, because I never hear the word "maybe" in there anywhere. It seems scientists are 100% certain what they are claiming is true, and yet, they lack 100% verifiable evidence and proof for their claims.

So you don't actually know what you're talking about...

Here's a really simple example of things scientists are TRYING to figure out.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/01/20-big-questions-in-science

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

People can definitely say they have a need to murder, just like the Yahweh claimed that he had a need to murder LOTS of people.

Actually, has never "murdered" anyone.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Science takes faith?

Do you know without a shadow of a doubt that there is no God? Can you prove it? Do you know without a shadow of a doubt that the universe was created by nothing, from nothing, for absolutely no reason? Can you prove it? If you do not know or cannot prove it, you have to have "faith" in science and your own understanding to believe it. To believe in the scientific "theories" on the origins of the universe requires "faith".

 

[Hikarifuru]

Actually, has never "murdered" anyone.

If I did those exact same things I'd go to jail for murder. Doublestandard much?

 

[amariselle]

Actually scientific theories are taught as scientific theories which by definition are extremely well tested verified and peer reviewed theories that are pretty much facts.... a common theory and a scientific theory are not the same thing. Gravity is a scientific theory.

No, they are presented as FACT not theories. There are no "maybes" or uncertainties included in their claims at all. I have heard and witnessed their claims time and time again, and they NEVER admit that they don't actually know for certain that what they're saying is true.

Give me an actual claim, not a "how about the origins of life?" You don't even know what theory you think you're talking about or what was actually said.

I did, and yes, I do know what I'm talking about.

That you don't think Hitler's actions are agreeable with Jesus' teachings is not relevant to whether or not Hitler thought he was serving Jesus.

Hitler didn't want to serve anyone but himself, and that is exactly what he did. I'm quite convinced that at times he actually thought he WAS God, many people who lived through his horrors have said the same.

But seriously? Jesus talked about putting people in a fiery furnace and burning them alive, and that's kind of what Hitler did. Jesus said only the believers will survive, Hitler was making a superior race, Hitler said he served Christ. You just don't like it. Hitler killed anyone he didn't value or like.... THAT'S WHAT GOD DID ALL THROUGH THE BIBLE.

So now you think Jesus and Hitler were basically the same? Wow...

You seriously need to read the Bible again. Until you do, and until you actually understand what it says, then there is no way I can have a conversation with you about it.

Oh, and please understand the absurdity of your claims. You are suggesting that Hitler claimed he served a Jew. Hitler hated ALL Jews, he had a passionate, murderous hatred for each and every one of them. You do realize Hitler had absolutely NO desire to serve Jesus right? Actually, given the chance, he would have killed Jesus along with all the other Jews. No, Hitler served only HIMSELF.

No.... you would be a sociopath if you couldn't have a moral system without your god... and it's true. Me, I'll always have a moral system because it's mine. My moral system is greater than yours is, it doesn't even allow God to do what you think god does, it doesn't allow anyone to hurt anyone. You just put your head in the dirt and refuse to admit that I have a moral system.

Oh the my system is better than your system argument....sorry, that defense proves nothing.

Oh, and your subjective idea of morality DOES allow people to hurt each other. A subjective morality allows people to do whatever they want to do. YOU may not think murder is right, but someone else does, and as long as that is THEIR subjective morality, then they are not doing anything wrong.

Actually no, they are wrong BECAUSE THEY HURT PEOPLE!!!!! You think the only reason rape and murder are wrong is because they an affront to your god, how selfish and deluded could you possibly be? Morality is about the hurting people, not god's lovely beautiful aura.

Again with those personal insults and attacks. You really aren't making yourself look very credible, when instead of defending your position, you choose to insult someone who doesn't agree with you.

You clearly have not listened to a word I've said. I think murder and rape are wrong because morality is objective, there is an absolute standard we are ALL held to. You on the other hand think morality is something that is defined by each person individually. In that case rape and murder are not wrong, because all the person who does these things needs to say in defense of their actions, is that such actions fit THEIR subjective view of morality.

It seems you are getting angry, (perhaps that's why you are resorting to personal insults and attacks) not surprising really when you are trying hopelessly to defend the indefensible idea of a subjective morality while still saying there is an absolute standard of goodness, such as not hurting others. You've admitted that there are huge flaws in your own position. I hope you really stop and think about what you're saying, it makes no sense.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Because we have evolved to be social creatures.

Survival of humans in the long term, is helped by aiding others.

Loins are also social creatures. Do you know what happens to all the Cubs when a new male lion takes power?