It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Problem of Evil and how it provides evidence for the existence of God.

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

You simply make statements you aren't giving any reason to believe what you are saying is true.





God is not the opposite of evil. The opposite of evil is good. Defining God as wholly good does not make God the whole of good. It is not necessary for God to exist for evil to exist.



Certain things are necessary for evil to actually exists. One of those things being some agent with intrinsic value rather than instrumental value. Another thing needed is Good. Theist believe in a God who is by nature Good. If your going to argue against a God that is not by nature Good meaning the Good is intrinsically not a part of his nature your making a strawman.





God cannot be both good and omnipotent. The desiderata are mutually incompatible.

Okay give me reasons to believe this?




posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 01:59 AM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

I didn't ask you to define objective morals I asked you to define three separate terms that we have been using this whole time. If we cannot agree on our definitions we cannot properly communicate.



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

You've already been given explanations about what are subjective morals. You just disagree with them based on your subjective opinion.

I'm done here because this thread was finished on page 1.



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:02 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Would your first three statements not boldly say that God is in fact Evil?




posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Nope. Only that his existence is required for the existence of evil as his existence is required for objective moral values and evil would be an objective moral value.



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:08 AM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79




You've already been given explanations about what are subjective morals. You just disagree with them based on your subjective opinion. I'm done here because this thread was finished on page 1.


I didn't ask you to define subjective morals either. I asked you to define moral value. Thats one word. Then I asked you to define the word subjective. Thats another word. Then I asked you to define objective?



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Why does God need to exist for evil to exist... unless said god is the author of evil?




posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Why are you the only one who gets to ask questions???

Isn't it polite to answer my question first before asking me yours???

This is a discussion correct??? Where we both ask and answer questions, not just one of us.
edit on 18-6-2016 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:19 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Because I am tired of talking in circles . Please define the terms so hopefully we can agree somewhere.



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon




Why does God need to exist for evil to exist... unless said god is the author of evil?


Because evil requires the existence of Good, but Good does not require the existence of evil. Evil is the lack of something that is. For example fairness and unfairness. You can have fairness without unfairness. Modesty and immodesty. Honest and dishonest.



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:31 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Fine.

I'm defining the word "Subjective" and the term "Moral Value" correct???

Subjective: Based on personal feelings or opinions.

Moral Value I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Are you meaning the importance one gives to a moral condition??? Or are you talking about "what are moral values" which is pretty much just a synonym for Morals isn't it???

If these definitions are so important for us to be in agreement on, why didn't you define them in the OP. That's usually how it goes. That way everyone from the start knows the definitions of the words you're using and we all understand each other from the get go. Now if we don't agree you'll just be defining them like you should have done in the OP anyway but we've now wasted all this time.



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:34 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb


You simply make statements you aren't giving any reason to believe what you are saying is true.

I don’t care what you believe, neither do I wish to convince anyone who does not want to be convinced. I am not here to argue with you, but to state the truth for those with the intelligence and courage to embrace it.

The evolutionary roots of morality are evident from the study of animal societies and instinctive altruistic behaviour in both humans and animals. The relationship between altruism and selective fitness can even be mathematically expressed. The information is readily available on the internet, both in the form of original scientific studies and philosophical interpretations, and in simplified terms suitable for the layperson.


Certain things are necessary for evil to actually exists. One of those things being some agent with intrinsic value rather than instrumental value.

The only things necessary for evil to exist are an entity capable of suffering and an environment in which to suffer. God is not necessary for the existence of either of those things.


Okay give me reasons to believe this?

If God exists, whence cometh evil?
Is He willing to prevent it, but not able? Then He is not omnipotent.
Is He able, but not willing? Then He is malevolent.
Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call Him God?


— Epicurus, c.341-270 BC

In over two thousand years, no theologian has ever provided a satisfactory answer. You are not going to be the first.


edit on 18/6/16 by Astyanax because: I've already wasted enough time on this nonsense.



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 02:37 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb


Because evil requires the existence of Good, but Good does not require the existence of evil.


Says who?


Evil is the lack of something that is. For example fairness and unfairness. You can have fairness without unfairness. Modesty and immodesty. Honest and dishonest.


one can not exist without the other in all your examples... You can not have fairness without unfairness, both exist as a possibility, but only one is practiced at one time




posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 03:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon




one can not exist without the other in all your examples... You can not have fairness without unfairness, both exist as a possibility, but only one is practiced at one time


Wrong. one is is simply not being the other. And to be fair
I was equating fairness with justice and was probably a mistake on my part as they are not the same.

Just-adj- based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair.
Justice-noun-just behavior or treatment.
Injustice-noun-lack of fairness or justice.

As you can see one is simply the lack of the other. Evil is simply a lack of that which is good. Without Good there would be no evil. Without God no Good.



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 03:08 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

You're equating the idea of light with your explanations...

Evil isn't the absence of Good... as dark is the absence of light




posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 03:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

I may be wrong. Give me an example of an evil that isn't the absence of something good?



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 03:26 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Can one be a shepherd and a lamb?



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 03:32 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Because I didn't think it was necessary but i can tell now I was mistaken. Okay so objective is not based on or influenced by opinion. Subjective is based on personal feelings or opinions. Now the last term, moral values. When we were talking and I said moral values are objective how do you understand the word moral values in that statement?
edit on 18-6-2016 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 03:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Akragon

I may be wrong. Give me an example of an evil that isn't the absence of something good?


lol really?

Stealing an oreo...

Nothing but selfish intentions




posted on Jun, 18 2016 @ 03:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

How are you defining selfish and intent here?




top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join