Posts by John_Mann

posted

496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

If eternal heaven is the greater good then is human existence on a hostile earth some kind of experiment? game? entertainment for God?
Humans came to existence by natural laws (evolution).
They developed a very sophisticated mind but they were not conscious (That's why Adam and Eve didn't knew about good and bad). They were just like the bicameral men proposed by Julian Jaynes.
In a very recent point in history (in Mesopotamia) God elevated human nature by giving an immortal soul to a couple of "bicameral" humans (Adam and Eve). This soul enables humans to have consciousness.
This process of unification between physical and spiritual nature in humans was interrupted by this couple someway somehow.
So the full double (physical + spiritual) human nature was broken.
This broken human nature are being repaired in a masterplan since then and will be complete in the Last Judgment.
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

But if natural evil is someway somehow necessary to accomplish a greater good like eternal heaven?
We see a lot of examples of necessary evil is needed to get a greater good. Like medical procedures.
We also must consider the very nature of God is the source of necessary laws that must be applied to all possible worlds.
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

Why?
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

But if he is exists then by his own definition of love he is unloving.
Cofty, try to suspend the property of existence in our conversation about God.
Pretend we are making a fictional character. But we want a logically consistent character with our known universe.
In this scenario do you think is impossible to build an all-loving and all-powerful being with the existence of natural evil?
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

Or maybe God is constrained by certain things.
He is. He is only constrained by His nature. That's why the God's nature (Godhead) is a complete mystery.
He can't lie and He can't be evil.
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

Do materialists really believe in "natural evil", or what do you mean by it? If there is no God or purpose behind things, isn't it a case of "natural indifference" rather than evil? If there is no God, what is the use of a concept such as "natural evil"?
In an atheist perspective why humans perceive evil at all? No other species perceive evil.
There's no evolutionary traces in other species leading to the development of human perception of moral and natural evil.
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

He's bound by His nature. From His nature comes natural or necessary truths. God cannot lie for instance.
The link makes a distinction between a world ruled by natural laws or a world ruled by miracle.
Possibly natural evil must be necessary and unavoidable to the existence of free-will. But the ultimate goal is a greater good.
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

http://www.aquinasonline.com/Topics/probevil.html
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

The truth is you was once very naive to believe in cultish theologies like the awful JW and Pentecostal faiths.
And when you realized how wrong they are you felt very ashamed of yourself. This overwhelming shame became revolt. So you feel a need to fight against anything related to God. And in your actual worldview you can't even imagine a logical concept of God is possible.
And you continue to be very naive when you say your atheism is validated by science. Or when you try to use science to argument against philosophical and metaphysical matters.
If you was a Catholic or a traditional Protestant you would never pass through an existential crisis. Being a traditional Christian would not prevent you to accomplish anything you like.
It was not Christianity the cause of your deception.
496
This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe
by cofty in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
John_Mann

My criticism of theism applies equally to every form of theology that teaches a loving god made the world.
No. Your criticism is only valid to creationism and calvinism. You always have in mind the JW and Pentecostal concepts of God. It's easy to be an atheist beating a very poor concept of God. It's almost a strawman fallacy.
My knowledge of theology is excellent. Unlike you I don't use it as an excuse to obfuscate.
You have a very poor knowledge about theology and philosophy (specially philosophy of science). Looks like you only know JW and calvinist theology.
Reality and theology are in opposition.
Just your opinion.