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.
The one thing I would add is that my argument is very specifically about "natural evil". In other words suffering that is not a result of human action but which occurs as a direct consequence of the way god designed the world.
This is the hardest problem in theology and the reason for that is a complete mystery. Even Saint Augustine declared total mystery about this problem.
Not just related to human suffering but related to non human animals too.
Indeed this is your best argument, cofty.
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.
Not one single word you have just typed addresses my question about the hiddenness of god.
It's the best answer I know.
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.
Then how do you explain the hiddenness of god?
Liberty.
We are in a time of test. Our lifetimes here on earth will show if we freely want to live with God or not.
This choice can only be made while we are alive. After death your intentions throughout your life will be fixed in your soul forever with no turning back.
Why no turning back? The free will our souls possess will be over in Heaven? No second chances after death?
Yes.
Why?
Because if you are confronted with two extreme unequal choices you lose your ability to freely choose. After death you will be able to see God and his reality in all his Glory. That would be the equivalent of a choice between receiving for free a marble and gold palace or a piece of chalk.
You can't use your freedom of choice in a situation like that. So God indeed intentionally hides His total Glory (reveals indirectly only a very little fraction of it) from us in this period in our lives.
That's why we say a man cannot see the Glory of God without dying. A man without its total freedom of choice is not a man anymore.
Freedom of choice needs total privacy too, that's why your mental intentions cannot be read by anyone. You have total privacy about your deepest thoughts/intentions.
You can change your intention as you wish while alive, you even can change it in your last breath. After that your will/intention will be fixed forever in your soul.
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.
The debate is not between two sorts of evidence - it is between evidence and faith. There is no contest.
I can assure you that I'm not interested in a contest of this kind.
Actually the Catholic Church is officially interested in a dialogue with Atheism. Because Atheism is really valid to a lot of concepts of God.
Sola Scriptura interpretation of Bible is considered a heresy to CC and is responsible for a lot of distorted concepts of God. The concept of Jehovah by JW's is an aberration. I'm an atheist to this concept of God.
Sometimes I think atheists here only consider the JW or the pentecostal concept of God.
But what's the point to use Atheism towards concepts from Buddhism or ancient concepts of God like Brahma?
Clearly there's concepts of God that modern Atheism doesn't apply.
What's the point to argue with evolution to religions that accept evolution entirely like Catholicism and Buddhism?
Clearly there's a lot of harmful things in JWism like shunning and refusal of blood transfusions. But if someday they abolish these doctrines they would become harmless IMHO. They would be just a group with crazy ideas about science and theology, nothing more.
But what really is so harmful in traditional Christianity, like Catholicism or Lutheranism, for example?
Atheists and theists have ideological enemies in common, like Nihilism.
Nihilism says life can't be meaningful by any way so the only thing to do is dive in a radical Hedonism and Cultural Relativism. And this thought is really dangerous to society.
Atheists and theists are both existencialists, they're opposed to Nihilism. Both think life can have meaning.
Atheists say you alone can build a meaning for life and they advise for a good and peaceful meaning. Atheists want to be good people, this is a fact.
Theists say that life has a meaning already set by God.
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.
It runs scared from reason and science every time.
Could you expand this assertion?
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.
If that is supposed to be an excuse for god then it is a pathetic one.
Not a theodicy but a defence.
Your god has been murdering millions of humans with tsunamis for thousands of years. Long before detection was possible.
Besides the implications of guilty this is a good point.
I can only say that we have faith in heavenly bliss to those who died by horrendous evil.
The problem of evil is very hard to contemplate.
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.
Because it's not demonstable and it's not provable. It's scientific terms it's a worthless concept. That's why it can be logically ruled out.
Until such time you can demonstrate it, obviously.
Asking scientific proof for a philosophical question?
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.
Cofty
I noticed that you approach the problem of evil with natural disasters. Specially the asian tsunami of 2004.
That's a good point.
But you know is very easy to predict a tsunami and that region is very familiar with this natural problem.
Why there was no warning about that tsunami?
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.
Show me evidence that no other animal besides humans can't and I'll grant your premise.
Behaviorism.
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.
Not in the least. You're still making claims and conflating two conclusions without any reason to believe several of the claims are true.
Also, it's really, really bad logic.
So, no, it's NOT better.
So you say my premise is false?
So tell what non human animal can conceive infinity.
Maybe a snake?
