The Perfect Argument

@fmf said
Just read SecondSon's post.

And then read my reply to it.

What does what you "got out of it" have to do with the words I typed?

I read both before I wrote what I said. Can you just answer my question? What were you saying I miss understood?

@secondson said
Yes, difficult, and the answer is simple, but not simplistic.

Please provide the simple answer as to why an all powerful and all loving deity doesn't intervene to end the suffering of an innocent child. (Or indeed, why He allows the child to suffer in the first place).

Yes yes, we can dilute the position and talk about suffering being a trial or that some suffering is a result of human sin or free will and so forth. But let us instead concentrate this simple answer on the terminal suffering of an infant. - If, when running a bath, I see a small spider has fallen into the water and is struggling, I instinctively help him out and set him on his way. Although not a God, I have the power and the heart to do this. Why doesn't your God act in a similar manner, if He is indeed omnipotent and perfectly loving?

(If it helps, there is 'no' simple answer to the above).

@kellyjay said
What were you saying I miss understood?

misunderstood

... unless you know a young lady with the surname Understood

@suzianne said
One thing missing from the formula here is the benefits gained from a religion in the here and now, the changes wrought in one's daily life.

All of the benefits in the here and now and changes in one's daily life can be had without belief in a deity or an afterlife, as any Buddhist or atheist will tell you.

@divegeester said
If Jupiter’s gasses had been previously examined, documented and published and accepted as fact, over a lifetime’s work by one or a group of scientists who’s careers had been defined by that work....and this work was being challenged by some new methods, then I’m pretty sure there would be a lot of personal interest and therefore a “human factor” would be involved.

The composition of Jupiter's atmosphere is an objective fact without any human interests involved; someone publishing something about Jupiter's atmosphere and staking his professional reputation on his publication is something else again, and does, as you point out, involve human interests. Don't confuse the menu for the meal; the menu is a human artefact, the carbohydrates in the potatoes are not.

@moonbus said
The composition of Jupiter's atmosphere is an objective fact without any human interests involved; someone publishing something about Jupiter's atmosphere and staking his professional reputation on his publication is something else again, and does, as you point out, involve human interests. Don't confuse the menu for the meal; the menu is a human artefact, the carbohydrates in the potatoes are not.

Are you suggesting there is no such thing as scientific competitiveness or jealousy?

@wolfgang59 said
misunderstood

... unless you know a young lady with the surname Understood

You are right I was incorrect!

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Please provide the simple answer as to why an all powerful and all loving deity doesn't intervene to end the suffering of an innocent child. (Or indeed, why He allows the child to suffer in the first place).

Yes yes, we can dilute the position and talk about suffering being a trial or that some suffering is a result of human sin or free will and so forth. But let u ...[text shortened]... indeed omnipotent and perfectly loving?

(If it helps, there is 'no' simple answer to the above).

You asked that as if you know what God is and isn’t doing.

@kellyjay said
You asked that as if you know what God is and isn’t doing.

No, I asked a question that is very simple to answer.

Over to you Secondson...

@ghost-of-a-duke said
No, I asked a question that is very simple to answer.

Over to you Secondson...

How do you know?

@kellyjay said
How do you know?

Because Secondson said so:

'Yes, difficult, and the answer is simple, but not simplistic.'

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Because Secondson said so:

'Yes, difficult, and the answer is simple, but not simplistic.'

VR shakes his head at "Silly goad"! 😉

-VR

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Because Secondson said so:

'Yes, difficult, and the answer is simple, but not simplistic.'

I've heard it said that the ancient rabbis, when asked why God loves His people, would answer; "God loves us because He loves us".

The real "difficulty", from my perspective, engaging with one that isn't aware of God's existence, is explaining God according to the revelation of Himself in His Word.

Why does God allow suffering? If God doesn't exist, then why does man allow human suffering?

Sure, lets use the evolutionary model to explain it. It's dog eat dog out there. Survival of the fittest. Natural selection? How much misery has been inflicted on the innocent by man? Untold!

Sure, God can intervene in the course of events relative to suffering and end it instantly. It would be easy for Him.

God's timetable, His sovereign will and His actions are according to His own council. God's omniscient remember?

And He's omnipotent. God will end the suffering. But if we think there's no God, that evolution explains the human condition, then we can expect more of what we've been experiencing in this world to continue for who knows how long.

There's no end in sight according to the evolutionary model. How long will it take till man evolves to the point where human suffering is abolished? How many more eons will pass while billions of human beings suffer and perish at the hands of men who have no fear of God?

The blame for suffering lies at the feet of man.

@kellyjay said
I read both before I wrote what I said. Can you just answer my question? What were you saying I miss understood?

This is what I posted: For the sake of discussion, in the scenario you describe [where "there is such a being, and we have His book that tells us how, who, what and why" and we believe this to be so], both Ghost of a Duke and I would probably be religionists in accordance with the revelation and instructions laid out in the "book" you mentioned.

@secondson said
I've heard it said that the ancient rabbis, when asked why God loves His people, would answer; "God loves us because He loves us".

The real "difficulty", from my perspective, engaging with one that isn't aware of God's existence, is explaining God according to the revelation of Himself in His Word.

Why does God allow suffering? If God doesn't exist, then why do ...[text shortened]... ish at the hands of men who have no fear of God?

The blame for suffering lies at the feet of man.

"The blame for suffering lies at the feet of man."

This is true, if you are conceding that God does not exist. (Which of course you're not). However, if God does exist, why isn't there time in his 'timetable' to end the suffering of an innocent child? As you say, He could end it instantly. It would be easy for him.

One doesn't have to be a God to realize it is inconceivable that an all-powerful and perfectly loving deity would have good reason to 'allow' an innocent child to suffer. What is to be gained by it?

I don't know with certainty if you are wrong that God does not exist. I do however know with certainty that you are wrong in saying the answer to this dilemma is a simple one. It is not simple. Indeed, it is so unfathomable that it is the dominant reason I (and many others) do not believe in God. That's how far from simple it is.