Comment by gjsman-1000
5 days ago
This is poorly thought through, as it requires a fundamental tenant: “If there is a God, he automatically has a duty to ensure there is no suffering, of any kind, for any reason, from any cause, or he is not good.”
No religion believes that. Every religion also has an explanation for suffering. Enough of the stupid cheap shots that were worn out centuries ago.
Every religion has a cop out for the fact the same God who is so gracious to save your life is also the God responsible for giving kids cancer.
It's a cheap shot because those explanations are absurdly cheap in their logic on how a ultimately-powerful being is there to save us while also being the master of all suffering.
> “If there is a God, he automatically has a duty to ensure there is no suffering, of any kind, for any reason, from any cause, or he is not good.”
Yes? If there's an all-loving God then it also being the source of all suffering does say it's not good. Why would a morally good being with this power decide to give horrible diseases to innocent kids? Or take your job away, and force you to pray for it so you can get another? It's a bit sadistic.
So again, if there's a God it doesn't care at all about us.
> It's a cheap shot because those explanations are absurdly cheap in their logic on how a ultimately-powerful being is there to save us while also being the master of all suffering.
"It's a cheap shot because it's cheap" is not an argument, the logic is circular.
> Why would a morally good being with this power decide to give horrible diseases to innocent kids? Or take your job away, and force you to pray for it so you can get another? It's a bit sadistic.
If a parent tells you don't date somebody, they're a bad fit; and you do so anyway, and they were a bad fit; do you blame your parents for not locking you in their basement to prevent it? Permissive will versus active will is Philosophy 101.
Read it again, I said: It's a cheap shot because the religious explanations to suffering are cheap, they are retconning a fundamentally flawed logic that is not possible to exist unless you invent a yet more convoluted reason. They still do not explain why the suffering can only be abated by being more pious, a good being wouldn't make you beg on their feet to show you deserve to be spared from the suffering it created.
So again, if there's a God, it doesn't care. If your God exists and makes you have to pray for it to solve the suffering it created, it's a sadistic one.
4 replies →