cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/23770280
this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2025
416 points (94.4% liked)
Atheist Memes
5665 readers
204 users here now
About
A community for the most based memes from atheists, agnostics, antitheists, and skeptics.
Rules
-
No Pro-Religious or Anti-Atheist Content.
-
No Unrelated Content. All posts must be memes related to the topic of atheism and/or religion.
-
No bigotry.
-
Attack ideas not people.
-
Spammers and trolls will be instantly banned no exceptions.
-
No False Reporting
-
NSFW posts must be marked as such.
Resources
International Suicide Hotlines
Non Religious Organizations
Freedom From Religion Foundation
Ex-theist Communities
Other Similar Communities
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think I'm starting to understand where we differ
Option 1: humans cannot do evil, only good (not free will)
Option 2: humans can do good and/or evil
Why imagine an illogical reality where both of these things can be true, we don't live in it. Being all powerful means such a reality can be made, but god chose not to make it. He bound us by this logic, not the other way around
This also gives the opportunity for a human being to turn away from evil at great sacrifice to themselves and choose to do good, and such a morally good act wouldn't be a good act if they had no choice. Why can't the argument then be reversed, if good exists in the world then god is either good or powerless to stop it
Because that's the topic of discussion: why is the world the way it is? This approach to discussion is one I see time and time again with religious people. You claim your god is all-powerful, all-knowing and all-knowing, while simultaneously binding him to your own rules of logic. Questions beyond that don't fit into that framework and are blocked off with "that's just not how things are".
Exactly, that's my point! The only logical conclusion is: your god chose to create evil. You can of course say that it's necessary for some reason, but IMO unless I can learn this reason there's no way for your god to actually be all-loving. That's exactly what abusers do - they say they're abusing you for your own good, it just has to be this way!
Why not? Who made that rule? Once again, it was made by your god. Why did he choose the rules so evil must happen for good to happen?
You're trying to twist the logic towards absolutes. Just because good exists doesn't mean god is all good, just like evil existing doesn't mean god is all evil. But evil existing does mean that god is not all good.
Fair enough, I can accept that. We live in a reality where you cannot have free will and only good at the same time. I can't imagine anything different so I can't follow you in that line of thinking, and since no such reality does exist it's a moot point
So following your analogy of abusers, if someone recommends an objectively good course of action, gives you the free will to follow it or not, and you don't, did they abuse you?
I get what you're saying but going back to the first point, this is the only reality we live in. Do you have any response that doesn't involve rejecting our reality? Can we say based on our current reality the freedom to do evil was necessary for goodness?
None of the positive things we've made as humans would have been possible without free thought, not electricity not the internet not architecture. If you want to imagine such a reality where this is possible without the capacity for evil then you're welcome to but it doesn't exist, so it serves nothing but avoiding the question
So follow that train of thought then, what is the inverse? What are the good things that show god can be good, stack them up against the evil things that show god can be evil (real madadam hours here)
How does heaven and hell factor into the equation? Would you accept that on the day of judgement and a neutral observer rewards the good and punishes the evil and subsequently allows only good onwards then god will be all good in your eyes?
Okay, but then why are you claiming your god to be all-powerful? Why do you bind him (and the discussion) by the rules we live by, which he created?
No? But if someone recommends an objectively good course of action, and makes someone rape me if I don't follow it, they did abuse me. That's the situation here - rapists wouldn't exist if your god didn't create the concept of rape. God knew when creating everything that this specific person would specifically rape me because I will choose not to follow gods recommendation. He could have chosen to create the universe so this doesn't happen, but he didn't even though he knew.
Again, why are you binding your all-powerful god by the same rules we live by, when he created the rules?
I'm also not convinced that evil must be possible for free will to exist. God didn't give us all of his powers - does that mean we don't have free will? If you can still have free will while being bound to a smaller subsection of choices, we can still have free will while only good is possible, it's just a matter of degrees.
If this is indeed true, your god is the reason this reality doesn't exist, so why can't I make this logical connection?
There is no inverse. You can't show that your god is all good if he created evil. That's the very center of our disagreement: you claim your god to be all-loving, I claim that he can't be since he created evil. Your position only works if you follow the abuser logic, or if you break the logic at some point. And breaking the logic is totally fine! That's what faith is in the end - the belief that something exists beyond our purview and logic. If your god truly exists (and I sincerely hope for you he does, that would be amazing!), he doesn't have to be bound by our logic. But personally I think it does mean you shouldn't claim the argument to be debunked :)
No, because he still created evil. I don't care if child rapists are punished, it doesn't un-rape the children they raped. God still created the universe knowing these children would be raped. This is an offense that IMO can't be corrected.