We have plenty of evidence, however, that God does not give a flying fuck about people getting what they deserve, at least as we understand it. — ToothyMaw
You need to address my definition, because, according to that, we can indeed declare him to be unjust. — ToothyMaw
Mainly just for the kinds of anthropomorphic, cartoon gods of evangelicals.
I'm not sure how you have determined god's state of mind to conclude it doesn't give a fuck. :smile: — Tom Storm
I get that, but I think this narrows the scope and nature of both god and evil. That's all I am saying. The world may be much vaster than this small fence around matters moral and metaphysical would suggest. — Tom Storm
If God cared, you don't think they would do something? Would God pussyfoot around so that we can have arguments like these? I think not. — ToothyMaw
You've probably missed the argument about the nature of god then. You're approaching this in human terms and thinking of god as a kind of very special human, with the same frame of reference. — Tom Storm
Just in saying that demonstrates to me you don't understand the argument.
Do you want to keep going in circles or have we reached the end for now? — Tom Storm
Are you even trying to understand what I am saying? — ToothyMaw
Have we taken up too much time on this? — Tom Storm
Is this an insult? We are exploring an argument, not trying to slight each other, right?
We disagree (partly) in a discussion forum - nothing wrong with that, right? — Tom Storm
I'll concede one thing here - you're right to say God may not be just by a human understanding of what is just. — Tom Storm
My problem is not this part of the argument, rather the implication that god is in some way a moral monster or 'choosing not to intervene'. — Tom Storm
From the perspective of omniscience what humans understand as injustice might look to be something utterly different. God may not consider intervention to be appropriate. — Tom Storm
They just claim that either God's plan is incomprehensible or that he has special reasons for suspending justice (the guilty will be judged in the afterlife, the existence of original sin, etc.). — ToothyMaw
Why does God potentially being totally incomprehensible mean that he isn't responsible for the injustices we suffer? I'm saying that relative to any human idea of justness God is not just. How is that wrong? — ToothyMaw
Then we should stop drawing any sort of positive wisdom or assurance from any personal ideas of what God is too — ToothyMaw
Si comprehendis non est Deus. — St. Augustine
. If God is just then there should be no injustice
2. There is injustice
Ergo,
3. God is not just [1, 2, MT] — Agent Smith
You're going to have to define God in your syllogism as that which eliminates the possibility of injustice. I'm not sure that is a generally accepted notion of God. Most religions accept that there is injustice. — Hanover
We have free will and it is our responsibility to create just outcomes in society. — Hallucinogen
Expecting God to do everything for us so we needn't do anything is lumping the means by which we show God who we are onto God's lap, which would be pointless because God created creation to see how we react to life. — Hallucinogen
But largely that is the God people actually argue for, not some deistic/agnostic formulation, and, thus, that is what I am addressing — ToothyMaw
Could god not be both a person and the universe simultaneously? — Benj96
you cannot have justice and good without its opposite — Benj96
But sadly in this duality god as the universe is ambivalent - because the system contains both good and evil, both chaos/destruction and order/creation - you cannot have justice and good without its opposite, and you cannot have free will either if only one or the other existed in isolation. — Benj96
He could make any two contradictory things possible at the same time if he so desires. — ToothyMaw
could even just be a human with no powers if he so desired, and could just make himself God again whenever. — ToothyMaw
everyone must just get what they deserve. — ToothyMaw
Sounds sort of fun. To live powerless for a while and allow others have the power and then resume control when needed - for example when there is too much abuse of his/her power and to restore the natural balance of things — Benj96
I don't think you can make a logical argument against an entity that can make two contradictory thing possible at the same time, as such a being would be able to invalidate the most perfect piece of human logic. — PhilosophyRunner
For instance, if we can verify the claim that donkeys are small separately from the claim that they are gray to come to the conclusion that they are indeed both small and gray, then we know that the statements "donkeys are small", and "donkeys are gray" are non-contradictory.
That might seem pretty basic, but it demonstrates that we have a means of knowing if God has made two logical statements contradictory. — ToothyMaw
I didn't say God didn't care about justice. I said that few religions solve the theodicy problem by just outright denial of the existence of evil.I suppose if people are cool with God not caring about justice my argument would do little to persuade anyone to think critically about God or their religion. — ToothyMaw
Then that we see donkeys are grey and donkeys are small can both happen at the same time, does not mean they are non-contradictory. I.e if a being exists that can make contradictory things happen, then the very basis of logic that we use everyday, would be suspect. — PhilosophyRunner
If the logic didn't work, we wouldn't be able to combine the separate statements that donkeys are both small and gray to describe a donkey. The logic is just as necessary to the donkey example as the fact that they are indeed observably small and gray. If God had changed the rules of logic in such a way as to make the combined statement about donkeys false, we would not be able to use the donkey logic to come to any conclusions about donkeys or other things at all. But we can - merely with the premises that donkeys are small and gray.
If I'm wrong on this one, someone who knows more about logic correct me, please. — ToothyMaw
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.