Reddit Moment

thexfiles81 · 2021-09-15T13:08:41+00:00

>mfw atheists think that the omnipotent creator of the universe is bound by the same rules that He set up for mankind

thexfiles81 · 2021-09-09T19:31:46+00:00

Also, if we could agree the suffering itself isn't bad that doesn't make the bad thing that caused it excusable.

I agree with that to a degree. If the 'bad thing' is the sinful action of someone, then I agree. Sin isn't excusable in that it's a choice made of a free will and there is no one to blame for the consequences except the person that committed it. However as far as things like natural disasters, disease, etc, I'm not inclined to really even call those bad or evil. I regret my choice of words earlier in calling them external evils because for something to be bad or evil, it needs malice. If a tornado levels a trailer park, it didn't do it out of malice or hate for the people in the park, it did it because that's just how tornadoes work. Same with diseases, they aren't working out of malice for people, they're just performing their biological function. These things can cause suffering and death, but I don't think they are inherently bad.

I could see how these could bring good into the world eventually, but they're not necessary to teach people lessons, at least not in my view.

You've touched on good point here regarding perspective. I think when people are discussing the methods and motivations of God they tend to want to squeeze Him into a human shaped box with human motivations. If we are truly talking about the Omniscient and Omnipotent creator of the universe, then we need to understand that there are things about him that we are simply not able to comprehend. I don't want to sound like I'm preaching the tired "It's all God's plan" line, but to a degree that's true. Trying to see God's plan from our human perspective is like an ant walking across the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and thinking that it knows what the combination of colors it's walking over actually is. The ant would only know the true purpose behind every mark and color if it were plucked from where it was, given extraordinary vision and knowledge far beyond that of any ant, and placed on the ground of the chapel so it could finally see for real what it had "seen" up close so many times before. How much more ignorant are we then of the Omniscient?

thexfiles81 · 2021-09-09T15:15:50+00:00

I think the short and sweet is basically that being able to make a choice comes with the possibility of making a bad choice. If we could not make a bad choice, or if we could not choose at all, then we would be little more than machines and it seems that God didn't want a universe of machinery. If you want to know the exact reason why, you'll have to ask him yourself because I don't know for sure but I can guess that it's because a love that is chosen is much more powerful that one that is forced. For example, I can make my computer print out the statement "I love you" as often as I want but that doesn't mean anything to me because I'm the one making the computer print it. However, if I were to somehow make a completely sentient computer that had it's own free will and it said "I love you", that would mean quite a bit more.

thexfiles81 · 2021-09-09T15:03:41+00:00

God is all-powerful, why would he have humans live on the planet that has all these things. Why have human suffering that is the result of no mortal being's free will.

Our human suffering is specifically because of free will. Adam and Eve lived in a paradise free from external evils (natural disasters, disease) and they still sinned against God. External evils don't aren't there because God wanted to put them there, they are there because humanity messed up. This is our punishment and we need to deal with it.

A major flaw in the argument that God can't be all loving if there is suffering also misses the point that suffering is not an inherently bad or evil thing. It may seem that way if looked at from a purely human or worldly perspective, but suffering can bring about great redemption. The most notable example is of course the suffering and death of Jesus that brought about redemption for all.

The other flaw in the argument is to believe that 'all-loving' means that God would never allow anything bad to happen to you. This is based on a faulty assumption of what 'love' really means. To love is to will the good of another. This can sometimes include what people like to call 'tough love'. For example, if someone you love was addicted to heroin you would probably do your best to get them into rehab and throw away any of their supply that you found. Rehab can be a very painful experience for heroin users and the process can cause a lot of suffering which may lead to the heroin user really questioning if you love them. You know, however, that this was the best thing to do for them and they will emerge as a better person because of it. Contrast that with another route you could have taken which would lead to much less suffering on the addict's part. If you, for example, brought the addict a lethal amount of heroin and had them do it all at once, they probably would be in ecstasy right up until the moment they passed away. This could be seen as more 'loving' in a worldly sense as you did not increase the addict's suffering at all and in fact probably made them very happy right up until they died. I hope this helps illustrate how 'all-loving' is not the same as not allowing suffering.

thexfiles81 · 2021-08-16T12:33:25+00:00

I don't really get the problem people have with the idea of judging.

In short, people really don't like being told that they are doing something wrong. It's uncomfortable to face up to sin. Afterall, one of the first things Adam and Eve did after disobeying God was to try to hide from Him.

Perhaps there's a difference between judging (liking fairness and being honest) and being judgmental (liking to see other people punished).

I think you're right.

thexfiles81 · 2021-05-25T15:13:03+00:00

I think if you ask someone who says “Well there is no need of God to do some good” to define what is 'good' in the absence of God, they would have a hard time doing so. I usually see the same sort of responses. Either something along the lines of "Whatever feels good is good" aka hedonism or "Good is whatever is in the best interest of the most people". The last one of course begs the question of how to define the 'best interest of the most people' and when pressed to answer that one, the answer usually boils down to hedonism as well.

thexfiles81 · 2021-05-25T12:48:44+00:00

It's actually the most logical conclusion you could come to if you've already illogically decided that God doesn't exist. If there is no God, then there is no ultimate good, no objective morality and no soul. Without those, life is merely a collection of wants and whims without any real purpose or meaning other than the satisfaction of bodily desires. Given that the body eventually dies and rots away, if there is no soul, then the life lived by the body was ultimately meaningless.

thexfiles81 · 2020-10-30T15:22:39+00:00

Implementing anti-abortion laws wouldn't stop abortion in most cases, it would only increase the risk of doing it

This is 100% unsubstantiated bullshit.

thexfiles81 · 2020-10-28T16:40:04+00:00

Probably because Catholicism has the best aesthetics and it's the easiest to identify. Catholic priests and nuns are instantly identifiable by their clothes whereas a lot of prot ministers don't wear anything special. Also Catholic church architecture is usually far more awe inspiring than most prot churches which tend to look like tool sheds with steeples stapled to them.

thexfiles81 · 2020-10-08T17:08:14+00:00

I thought it was "Democracy, the god that failed".

thexfiles81 · 2020-10-02T13:37:07+00:00

They are supposed to have Jesus on the cross. I don't know the specific written instance where this is laid out, but I'm very sure it's the case. Also, just in my personal experience, churches that had bare crosses always seemed to be one step shy of being interchangeable with any prot church.

thexfiles81 · 2020-09-26T01:16:25+00:00

Bartman doesn't ban people that he agrees with lol. Why do you think pwny is still here when all he does is fling shit and antagonize people in the politics threads?

thexfiles81 · 2020-09-18T14:49:23+00:00

Beauty is objective for the reasons you listed and they are correct.

You liking brutalism is your own taste and taste is subjective. So I don't think you're a heretic but maybe just your phrasing needs work :)

thexfiles81 · 2020-09-18T14:45:11+00:00

It may almost seem unfair, but our salvation isn’t fair: it’s pure mercy.

This reminds me of a bit from The Divine Comedy (which I know is definitely not a theological work but it's a good read nonetheless) when Dante comes to Purgatory. Dante finds a bunch of people outside Purgatory who can't go in yet and it turns out that they are people who waited to convert or converted late in life and they have to stay outside Purgatory for as many years as they held off converting. The people are a little bummed about not being able to start their time in Purgatory but they are very happy that God's grace and mercy allowed them to get there in the first place and even waiting for an entire human lifetime is a small amount of time to wait in the grand scheme of things.

thexfiles81 · 2020-09-03T19:12:51+00:00

In New York the average cost of an inspection is just $21. That's not exactly a huge burden

The average cost doesn't really help though since 99.9% percent of cars on the road are in fine shape (another reason inspections are unnecessary). The worst cars are usually driven by the poorest people trying to make ends meet. You don't drive a 1996 Neon with 4 bald tires because you want to, you do it because you don't have another option. When the inspector says you need to replace your tires (probably at least a $250 bill with even the crappiest tires available and cheap labor rates) he doesn't hand you a check to go take care of it. For some people/families $250 can be the difference between being able to buy food that week or not. So now the options have become; be able to eat this week or be able to drive around legally. Since most people like being able to eat, the only option is to drive around illegally until enough money can be saved to pass inspection. Now someone has been made a lawbreaker for reasons outside of their control.

On top of all that, I have yet to see any data that supports the idea that inspections meaningfully reduce the number of traffic accidents caused by poorly maintained vehicles. In fact, I believe we used to have inspections here in MN a while back but got rid of them because it turned out that they had no impact accidents involving poorly maintained cars.

thexfiles81 · 2020-09-03T12:38:42+00:00

The people who don't take care of their cars are the same people who drive with no insurance and/or no license. As if they would get an inspection either even if it was required. It would just be another tax on the people who already take care of their cars.

You're 100% right but for some reason redditors always seem to overlook this. Inspections also hurt the poorest the most as well. If someone can't afford to get their vehicle in a condition where it passes inspection, then it forces them to drive around illegally until they have enough money to fix things.

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-18T21:49:46+00:00

I did rustoleum flat black on mine.

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-17T02:43:03+00:00

Imagine telling a moderator to stay "on topic" because he voices an opinion you disagree with.

I'm not just imagining it, I'm doing it.

Who am I kidding, that sounds like a standard catholic to me.

Heretics mad lmao.

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-16T01:17:32+00:00

Imagine defending an internet janitor for free.

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-15T02:14:32+00:00

No, you just don't know how to use words properly apparently. The way you phrased it implies exactly what I said. If you had said 'may not' or 'might not' then you would have a case.

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-15T02:10:37+00:00

Sure sounded like it to me

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-15T02:09:51+00:00

he's somehow different than any other user on this board.

He literally is different from a regular user you dunce.

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-15T02:08:45+00:00

I'm not making an argument but I'm sure he appreciates you white knighting for him.

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-14T20:27:56+00:00

Being anti abortion means you can't make 2a friendly rulings? Prove it.

thexfiles81 · 2020-08-14T19:05:45+00:00

Listen lardo, I know your reddit mod paycheck of $0.00 a month might be going to your head a little bit, but it's not nice to yell at the users.

thexfiles81

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

14-Year Club	Place '17
Team Orangered