Jacob Rees-Mogg

[otolith]

Mr Gearchange said:

Jinx said:

AstonZagato said:

I think the usual defences that Christians trot out are:
1. He doesn't want to rob humans of free will
Humans create much of the evil we see through their choices. He doesn't stop that on the basis that we would be puppets.
2. Because evil is a necessary part of life
Without death, there is no life. Cell replication creates life but it also creates cancer. God will make it up to everyone in the afterlife.
3. Suffering is part of knowing God
It is only by having your faith tested that one can truly believe.

Or it could be that there is no God and life is a bit ste.

Or without suffering humans tend to turn out to be a bit st. The phrase spoilt brats comes to mind if you read the bible through (and look at how many of those born with a silver spoon turn out) - much of the evil in the world is perpetuated by humans and perhaps before we yell at the sky for not making it fair and rosy perhaps we could ask ourselves what we as individuals have done to make it better.
st will still happen but there would be a lot less to go round if we were a little better to each other.

Yes, thank god for childhood cancer to keep us all on the straight and narrow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPriOQkKd6k

[Jinx]

Mr Gearchange said:

Yes, thank god for childhood cancer to keep us all on the straight and narrow.

A straight and narrow what?

[Mr Gearchange]

Jinx said:

Mr Gearchange said:

Yes, thank god for childhood cancer to keep us all on the straight and narrow.

A straight and narrow what?

The straight and narrow path of righteousness of course.

Your assertion being that without horrible tragedy, pain, suffering and misery humans tend to turn out 'a bit st'.

So god in his love and wisdom gave us childhood cancer, ebola virus, tsunami's, plague, horrific genetic diseases and those worms that eat kids eyes from the inside out making them blind.

God really is love. Thanks God.

[Jinx]

Mr Gearchange said:

The straight and narrow path of righteousness of course.

Your assertion being that without horrible tragedy, pain, suffering and misery humans tend to turn out 'a bit st'.

So god in his love and wisdom gave us childhood cancer, ebola virus, tsunami's, plague, horrific genetic diseases and those worms that eat kids eyes from the inside out making them blind.

God really is love. Thanks God.

I'm not peddling righteousness - that is for organised religions. I'm peddling compassion. Suffering happens and can happen to anyone at anytime - if it wasn't random then it would be targeted. If it was targeted then you have someone to shake your fist at and blame.
Virus's, worms, plagues - frequently the consequence of unsanitary conditions - this is well within mankind's remit to reduce and in some cases eliminate. tsunamis? Early warning systems, engineering, technology - again we can reduce the impacts and lesson the suffering ourselves if we have enough compassion.
Genetic disorders? Consequences of evolution (life) and again with enough compassion we can ease the symptoms and with the desire create bio-technologies to reduce the likelihood.
The new testament showed God's singular promise - an end to suffering (for everyone - though in some cases this is death ) If you wish to live without suffering than the path is through Jesus (via death) - that pretty much covers the message in the new testament. And that's a fine message for after you have died.
In the mean time doing what you can to reduce suffering in the here and now shows that you are paying attention and the you understand the worth of what is promised.
Without suffering there is no growth (things might get bigger but they won't get better). Without growth there is no life. Without life?
Now you ask why if God is omnipotent he didn't do things a different way and we could all be wonderful without suffering?
Maybe He did - just not here. Maybe the results were a bunch of prideful entities that had no compassion for all the other life around them (the watchers maybe)?
If He was omnipotent why doesn't he just answer all the prayers when asked and smite those that cause suffering to others? And what would that create - loving free individuals or fear and slaves?
My assertion is based purely on the data - being good is not the same as being nice - no one said God is nice.

[chrispmartha]

Jinx said:

Mr Gearchange said:

The straight and narrow path of righteousness of course.

Your assertion being that without horrible tragedy, pain, suffering and misery humans tend to turn out 'a bit st'.

So god in his love and wisdom gave us childhood cancer, ebola virus, tsunami's, plague, horrific genetic diseases and those worms that eat kids eyes from the inside out making them blind.

God really is love. Thanks God.

I'm not peddling righteousness - that is for organised religions. I'm peddling compassion. Suffering happens and can happen to anyone at anytime - if it wasn't random then it would be targeted. If it was targeted then you have someone to shake your fist at and blame.
Virus's, worms, plagues - frequently the consequence of unsanitary conditions - this is well within mankind's remit to reduce and in some cases eliminate. tsunamis? Early warning systems, engineering, technology - again we can reduce the impacts and lesson the suffering ourselves if we have enough compassion.
Genetic disorders? Consequences of evolution (life) and again with enough compassion we can ease the symptoms and with the desire create bio-technologies to reduce the likelihood.
The new testament showed God's singular promise - an end to suffering (for everyone - though in some cases this is death ) If you wish to live without suffering than the path is through Jesus (via death) - that pretty much covers the message in the new testament. And that's a fine message for after you have died.
In the mean time doing what you can to reduce suffering in the here and now shows that you are paying attention and the you understand the worth of what is promised.
Without suffering there is no growth (things might get bigger but they won't get better). Without growth there is no life. Without life?
Now you ask why if God is omnipotent he didn't do things a different way and we could all be wonderful without suffering?
Maybe He did - just not here. Maybe the results were a bunch of prideful entities that had no compassion for all the other life around them (the watchers maybe)?
If He was omnipotent why doesn't he just answer all the prayers when asked and smite those that cause suffering to others? And what would that create - loving free individuals or fear and slaves?
My assertion is based purely on the data - being good is not the same as being nice - no one said God is nice.

Or maybe 'he' just doesn't exist and it's all man made?

But anyway why should this 'god' you described be worthy of praise?

[Jinx]

chrispmartha said:

Or maybe 'he' just doesn't exist and it's all man made?

All things are possible.

chrispmartha said:

But anyway why should this 'god' you described be worthy of praise?

How many universes did you create today? Oh and do you criticise the chef for the broken eggs before you have seen the omelet?

[chrispmartha]

Jinx said:

chrispmartha said:

Or maybe 'he' just doesn't exist and it's all man made?

All things are possible.

chrispmartha said:

But anyway why should this 'god' you described be worthy of praise?

How many universes did you create today? Oh and do you criticise the chef for the broken eggs before you have seen the omelet?

There are many many things that really aren't possible.

On your second point, sounds like utter rubbish spouted by religious people who have no answer to reason to me.

[loafer123]

Religion is simply a method of subjugating the masses.

I am certain that good things also come out of it, in the same way that being an associate of the mafia brings benefits, and I am grateful that the sense of community helps people including my Mother in Law.

Nevertheless, it is a human construct, with no evidence or proof.

[FN2TypeR]

Mr Gearchange said:

Jinx said:

Mr Gearchange said:

Yes, thank god for childhood cancer to keep us all on the straight and narrow.

A straight and narrow what?

The straight and narrow path of righteousness of course.

Your assertion being that without horrible tragedy, pain, suffering and misery humans tend to turn out 'a bit st'.

So god in his love and wisdom gave us childhood cancer, ebola virus, tsunami's, plague, horrific genetic diseases and those worms that eat kids eyes from the inside out making them blind.

God really is love. Thanks God.

Ant and Dec, too - we must have been a bad species indeed

[Angrybiker]

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.

There's only two answers to the question of evil

1. He chooses not to do anything about it

2. He is unable to do anything about it

Either answer means he's not worthy of consideration.

Or more simply he just doesn't exist.

Awww I feel so sorry for you that you have to do all these things yourself. Obviously if you're not living in the garden of eden, carefree and burden free, then OF COURSE God doesn't exist!!! If he did then it would be his OBLIGATION to make sure you had everything you ever wished for.
lol.

[BMWBen]

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.

There's only two answers to the question of evil

1. He chooses not to do anything about it

2. He is unable to do anything about it

Either answer means he's not worthy of consideration.

Or more simply he just doesn't exist.

Awww I feel so sorry for you that you have to do all these things yourself. Obviously if you're not living in the garden of eden, carefree and burden free, then OF COURSE God doesn't exist!!! If he did then it would be his OBLIGATION to make sure you had everything you ever wished for.
lol.

?? He was talking about Adolf Hitler massacring millions of people, not him having everything he ever wished for. Talk about moving the goalposts

Do you not see that your position is based on the premise that your belief is true (i.e that the christian theistic god exists), and therefore it can't be used to argue that your belief is true? It's called a circular argument, and it's not valid.


You've done this:
1. There is a god and he's like the way my christian beliefs tell me he is
2. My christian beliefs tell me that he allows evil so that I can exercise my free will
3. If he took away evil there would be no point to my christian life.
4. Evil is therefore necessary and does not prove that the christian god doesn't exist.

If you take away step 1, then the argument falls apart, but you're using it to try and prove step 1. It doesn't work, these are basic rules of logical reasoning.

[Angrybiker]

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.

There's only two answers to the question of evil

1. He chooses not to do anything about it

2. He is unable to do anything about it

Either answer means he's not worthy of consideration.

Or more simply he just doesn't exist.

Awww I feel so sorry for you that you have to do all these things yourself. Obviously if you're not living in the garden of eden, carefree and burden free, then OF COURSE God doesn't exist!!! If he did then it would be his OBLIGATION to make sure you had everything you ever wished for.
lol.

?? He was talking about Adolf Hitler massacring millions of people, not him having everything he ever wished for. Talk about moving the goalposts

Do you not see that your position is based on the premise that your belief is true (i.e that the christian theistic god exists), and therefore it can't be used to argue that your belief is true? It's called a circular argument, and it's not valid.


You've done this:
1. There is a god and he's like the way my christian beliefs tell me he is
2. My christian beliefs tell me that he allows evil so that I can exercise my free will
3. If he took away evil there would be no point to my christian life.
4. Evil is therefore necessary and does not prove that the christian god doesn't exist.

If you take away step 1, then the argument falls apart, but you're using it to try and prove step 1. It doesn't work, these are basic rules of logical reasoning.

I'm not doing any of that, I'm just making fun of the logic that 'Evil exists, therefore there is not God'.

[BMWBen]

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.

There's only two answers to the question of evil

1. He chooses not to do anything about it

2. He is unable to do anything about it

Either answer means he's not worthy of consideration.

Or more simply he just doesn't exist.

Awww I feel so sorry for you that you have to do all these things yourself. Obviously if you're not living in the garden of eden, carefree and burden free, then OF COURSE God doesn't exist!!! If he did then it would be his OBLIGATION to make sure you had everything you ever wished for.
lol.

?? He was talking about Adolf Hitler massacring millions of people, not him having everything he ever wished for. Talk about moving the goalposts

Do you not see that your position is based on the premise that your belief is true (i.e that the christian theistic god exists), and therefore it can't be used to argue that your belief is true? It's called a circular argument, and it's not valid.


You've done this:
1. There is a god and he's like the way my christian beliefs tell me he is
2. My christian beliefs tell me that he allows evil so that I can exercise my free will
3. If he took away evil there would be no point to my christian life.
4. Evil is therefore necessary and does not prove that the christian god doesn't exist.

If you take away step 1, then the argument falls apart, but you're using it to try and prove step 1. It doesn't work, these are basic rules of logical reasoning.

I'm not doing any of that, I'm just making fun of the logic that 'Evil exists, therefore there is not God'.

But that's what that argument does... The logic you're making fun of is only amusing if you've already decided that the christian beliefs are true. If you don't believe them to be infallible and true then it points out an obvious problem. As such it's not a great argument to use against someone who believes, because they just insert the assumption that their picture of a god exists and it all seems fine to them.

The question you need to ask is "how do you know that your god works like that?" to which the answer is...?

[Angrybiker]

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.

There's only two answers to the question of evil

1. He chooses not to do anything about it

2. He is unable to do anything about it

Either answer means he's not worthy of consideration.

Or more simply he just doesn't exist.

Awww I feel so sorry for you that you have to do all these things yourself. Obviously if you're not living in the garden of eden, carefree and burden free, then OF COURSE God doesn't exist!!! If he did then it would be his OBLIGATION to make sure you had everything you ever wished for.
lol.

?? He was talking about Adolf Hitler massacring millions of people, not him having everything he ever wished for. Talk about moving the goalposts

Do you not see that your position is based on the premise that your belief is true (i.e that the christian theistic god exists), and therefore it can't be used to argue that your belief is true? It's called a circular argument, and it's not valid.


You've done this:
1. There is a god and he's like the way my christian beliefs tell me he is
2. My christian beliefs tell me that he allows evil so that I can exercise my free will
3. If he took away evil there would be no point to my christian life.
4. Evil is therefore necessary and does not prove that the christian god doesn't exist.

If you take away step 1, then the argument falls apart, but you're using it to try and prove step 1. It doesn't work, these are basic rules of logical reasoning.

I'm not doing any of that, I'm just making fun of the logic that 'Evil exists, therefore there is not God'.

But that's what that argument does... The logic you're making fun of is only amusing if you've already decided that the christian beliefs are true. If you don't believe them to be infallible and true then it points out an obvious problem. As such it's not a great argument to use against someone who believes, because they just insert the assumption that their picture of a god exists and it all seems fine to them.

The question you need to ask is "how do you know that your god works like that?" to which the answer is...?

No, it's amusing simply because it's not logical.

[chrispmartha]

I don't get why anyone would want the omnipotent 'god' thing to be true anyway.

Having your destiny already being decided is one thing but it to ne decided by an egotistical tyranical despot just sounds like well 'hell' to me

[BMWBen]

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.

There's only two answers to the question of evil

1. He chooses not to do anything about it

2. He is unable to do anything about it

Either answer means he's not worthy of consideration.

Or more simply he just doesn't exist.

Awww I feel so sorry for you that you have to do all these things yourself. Obviously if you're not living in the garden of eden, carefree and burden free, then OF COURSE God doesn't exist!!! If he did then it would be his OBLIGATION to make sure you had everything you ever wished for.
lol.

?? He was talking about Adolf Hitler massacring millions of people, not him having everything he ever wished for. Talk about moving the goalposts

Do you not see that your position is based on the premise that your belief is true (i.e that the christian theistic god exists), and therefore it can't be used to argue that your belief is true? It's called a circular argument, and it's not valid.


You've done this:
1. There is a god and he's like the way my christian beliefs tell me he is
2. My christian beliefs tell me that he allows evil so that I can exercise my free will
3. If he took away evil there would be no point to my christian life.
4. Evil is therefore necessary and does not prove that the christian god doesn't exist.

If you take away step 1, then the argument falls apart, but you're using it to try and prove step 1. It doesn't work, these are basic rules of logical reasoning.

I'm not doing any of that, I'm just making fun of the logic that 'Evil exists, therefore there is not God'.

But that's what that argument does... The logic you're making fun of is only amusing if you've already decided that the christian beliefs are true. If you don't believe them to be infallible and true then it points out an obvious problem. As such it's not a great argument to use against someone who believes, because they just insert the assumption that their picture of a god exists and it all seems fine to them.

The question you need to ask is "how do you know that your god works like that?" to which the answer is...?

No, it's amusing simply because it's not logical.

Really? Explain.

[Angrybiker]

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.

There's only two answers to the question of evil

1. He chooses not to do anything about it

2. He is unable to do anything about it

Either answer means he's not worthy of consideration.

Or more simply he just doesn't exist.

Awww I feel so sorry for you that you have to do all these things yourself. Obviously if you're not living in the garden of eden, carefree and burden free, then OF COURSE God doesn't exist!!! If he did then it would be his OBLIGATION to make sure you had everything you ever wished for.
lol.

?? He was talking about Adolf Hitler massacring millions of people, not him having everything he ever wished for. Talk about moving the goalposts

Do you not see that your position is based on the premise that your belief is true (i.e that the christian theistic god exists), and therefore it can't be used to argue that your belief is true? It's called a circular argument, and it's not valid.


You've done this:
1. There is a god and he's like the way my christian beliefs tell me he is
2. My christian beliefs tell me that he allows evil so that I can exercise my free will
3. If he took away evil there would be no point to my christian life.
4. Evil is therefore necessary and does not prove that the christian god doesn't exist.

If you take away step 1, then the argument falls apart, but you're using it to try and prove step 1. It doesn't work, these are basic rules of logical reasoning.

I'm not doing any of that, I'm just making fun of the logic that 'Evil exists, therefore there is not God'.

But that's what that argument does... The logic you're making fun of is only amusing if you've already decided that the christian beliefs are true. If you don't believe them to be infallible and true then it points out an obvious problem. As such it's not a great argument to use against someone who believes, because they just insert the assumption that their picture of a god exists and it all seems fine to them.

The question you need to ask is "how do you know that your god works like that?" to which the answer is...?

No, it's amusing simply because it's not logical.

Really? Explain.

Seriously?? Holy cow....

[BMWBen]

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.

There's only two answers to the question of evil

1. He chooses not to do anything about it

2. He is unable to do anything about it

Either answer means he's not worthy of consideration.

Or more simply he just doesn't exist.

Awww I feel so sorry for you that you have to do all these things yourself. Obviously if you're not living in the garden of eden, carefree and burden free, then OF COURSE God doesn't exist!!! If he did then it would be his OBLIGATION to make sure you had everything you ever wished for.
lol.

?? He was talking about Adolf Hitler massacring millions of people, not him having everything he ever wished for. Talk about moving the goalposts

Do you not see that your position is based on the premise that your belief is true (i.e that the christian theistic god exists), and therefore it can't be used to argue that your belief is true? It's called a circular argument, and it's not valid.


You've done this:
1. There is a god and he's like the way my christian beliefs tell me he is
2. My christian beliefs tell me that he allows evil so that I can exercise my free will
3. If he took away evil there would be no point to my christian life.
4. Evil is therefore necessary and does not prove that the christian god doesn't exist.

If you take away step 1, then the argument falls apart, but you're using it to try and prove step 1. It doesn't work, these are basic rules of logical reasoning.

I'm not doing any of that, I'm just making fun of the logic that 'Evil exists, therefore there is not God'.

But that's what that argument does... The logic you're making fun of is only amusing if you've already decided that the christian beliefs are true. If you don't believe them to be infallible and true then it points out an obvious problem. As such it's not a great argument to use against someone who believes, because they just insert the assumption that their picture of a god exists and it all seems fine to them.

The question you need to ask is "how do you know that your god works like that?" to which the answer is...?

No, it's amusing simply because it's not logical.

Really? Explain.

Seriously?? Holy cow....

Interesting choice of phrase

Humour me. Or maybe you can't explain...

[Angrybiker]

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.


No, it's amusing simply because it's not logical.

Really? Explain.

Seriously?? Holy cow....

Interesting choice of phrase

Humour me. Or maybe you can't explain...

No, I'm not going to explain basic logic to you. Raise your own game.

[BMWBen]

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

BMWBen said:

Angrybiker said:

Smollet said:

gadgetmac said:

Or let innocents die whilst allowing Hitler and all of the sadists continue to live.


No, it's amusing simply because it's not logical.

Really? Explain.

Seriously?? Holy cow....

Interesting choice of phrase

Humour me. *Or maybe you can't explain...*

No, I'm not going to explain basic logic to you. Raise your own game.

Didn't think so. I've pointed out what the flaw is in what you said earlier, you haven't responded other than to say "I'm obviously wrong" but without any further justification or attempt at explaining why.

Much like you did earlier in the thread too. Seems like a rather pointless contribution to me!