Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

[cynic]

Why is suffering wrong? Seriously?

We all raise our children hoping that they wouldn't suffer. Hoping they can live healthy and productive lives etc. etc. Then at the end of the day, when they die after a long life, they would look back and see the good and great deeds they've done and be proud of it. So that's not suffering.

Now, if each of us parent have the power of God... or have lotsa money, we would use it to ease any suffering our children runs into. Wouldn't we?

So why is the almighty god exempt from that and still be seen as a good "father"?

Say a parent whose kids ran into trouble... should the parent just ignore it? Saying... I told you not to do so and so; you didn't listen and follow my commandment... then suffer the consequences. Learn to live with your mistake, or die of it... either way, it's a valuable lesson.

There are religious people who follow such logic... they tend to also be aholes. I've met a few of them in my life... all religious on the outside but inside it's just screwed up logic and excuses, being cruel to be kind bs.

Before I respond, I need to be clear on a few things about what you believe.

Firstly can you confirm, whether or not, you are saying that suffering is wrong?

Secondly, in a temporal existence where deeds are done, what is your definition of a good deed?

Thirdly, how are such deeds good, and what purpose is served by those good deeds?

 

[luutzu]

Before I respond, I need to be clear on a few things about what you believe.

Firstly can you confirm, whether or not, you are saying that suffering is wrong?

Secondly, in a temporal existence where deeds are done, what is your definition of a good deed?

Thirdly, how are such deeds good, and what purpose is served by those good deeds?

Yes, suffering is wrong. It's totally screwed for a God to stand by and watch people suffer when he could just end it.

"good deeds" are deeds that does not harm anyone and help or benefit them and yourself.

What purpose does it serve? Maybe a gold medal or a sticker?

 

[cynic]

Yes, suffering is wrong. It's totally screwed for a God to stand by and watch people suffer when he could just end it.

"good deeds" are deeds that does not harm anyone and help or benefit them and yourself.

What purpose does it serve? Maybe a gold medal or a sticker?

Okay, based upon your response, I can see that you fail to recognise the importance of suffering!
Which leads me to the confident assertion that you are guiltier, than that god you've chosen to condemn, for intentionally bringing more human suffering into the world via your offspring!

And what about pain? Is that not a form of suffering? Does it not serve a valuable purpose in communicating something useful?

When the obstetrician smacks the bottom of the new born infant, is he committing a sin by inflicting suffering?

When a brain screams that there is pain in a hand accidentally placed on a hot plate, is the brain wrong to convey a message of suffering?

As to your definition of good deeds, how is that useful, if everyone alive today is going to be dead forevermore some time in the future? What possible value could those deeds have, when it would be far easier for everyone to self extinguish and thereby eliminate all future suffering?

Given your stance on the wrongness of suffering, how is your decision to continue living, knowing that some future suffering is certainly entailed, rational?

Where is the sanity in your philosophy?

 

[Value Collector]

According to that news article I posted, at least 69 of those claimed medical miracles remain unexplained.

Anyway, you have misunderstood the intended meaning of my post. I was most certainly not saying that the bar was impossibly high for a divine being.

Please do not even pretend that the regrowing of a limb would ever be sufficient to persuade you to alter your antitheistic viewpoint.

What sort of a god would jump through hoops in a vain effort to persuade somebody like you?

The god that I believe in, certainly isn't that stupid!

So because it is unexplained, you think it’s best to just make up an explanation?

What I am saying is that the medical claims about miracles always seem to be trivial things, nothing major as I said like regrowing a limb or surviving a beheading etc, that would be more impressive.

 

[grah33]

The fact that thousands witnessed it and believed it was a miracle is just testimony to the gullibility of simple poorly educated masses. Remember, these are the same people who fall for the miracle incision free surgery trickery rampant in the Philippines, where fraudsters appear to put their hands into the chests of people suffering ailments and pull out the bad parts without any incision being made.

Whilst I happen to be very theistic in my views, and believe miracles to be an everpresent feature of existence, I do get somewhat concerned when readily explicable phenomena are hastily attributed to "supernatural" or "paranormal" causes.

you know, I think our reasoning is slightly floored ... Cynic (bell too), can u explain a possible interpretation of it for me? It doesn't seem so easy to explain. You see, when I saw that clip, like Bell I made the assumption that the youtuber/s wasn't lying. This means that the crowd saw something spectacular, and the mobile phone recording was good enough to convey what they saw . Thus trying to explain how a phone can erroneously record a light source is pointless now since the crowd actually saw something that was impressive enough ( it would be more lovelier in real life ). What i'm saying is, explaining the potential for an illusion on the mobile phone is a pointless exercise.


Or the youtuber/s are lying. Then it's a different ball game of course.

Many of the atheists are actually focusing on case 1 from what i've seen online– trying to explain the sky/elements bending the light. As far as I know, know such natural phenomena exists, that looks like that. Back to what I said before, if one assumes the youtuber isn't lying, then the best explanation would seem to be a miracle, since God is what they're looking for up there.

 

[cynic]

So because it is unexplained, you think it’s best to just make up an explanation?
...

No. I think it's best to continue seeking to expand human understanding of any seemingly incomprehensible phenomena.

What I am saying is that the medical claims about miracles always seem to be trivial things, nothing major as I said like regrowing a limb or surviving a beheading etc, that would be more impressive.

A trivial thing should ideally be readily explicable. The purported 69 miracles were not, since they defied medical explanation. As such they cannot currently be readily dismissed as trivial.

Your continued efforts to justify your philosophical stance are becoming increasingly amusing.

What gives you the right to dictate how a deity should behave?

If there is some event, the occurrence of which, would convince you of the existence of one or more higher beings, I'd be interested to hear of it.

So far you just seem to be trotting out the fashionable arguments, currently circulating throughout the anti-theist community.

 

[luutzu]

Okay, based upon your response, I can see that you fail to recognise the importance of suffering!
Which leads me to the confident assertion that you are guiltier, than that god you've chosen to condemn, for intentionally bringing more human suffering into the world via your offspring!

And what about pain? Is that not a form of suffering? Does it not serve a valuable purpose in communicating something useful?

When the obstetrician smacks the bottom of the new born infant, is he committing a sin by inflicting suffering?

When a brain screams that there is pain in a hand accidentally placed on a hot plate, is the brain wrong to convey a message of suffering?

As to your definition of good deeds, how is that useful, if everyone alive today is going to be dead forevermore some time in the future? What possible value could those deeds have, when it would be far easier for everyone to self extinguish and thereby eliminate all future suffering?

Given your stance on the wrongness of suffering, how is your decision to continue living, knowing that some future suffering is certainly entailed, rational?

Where is the sanity in your philosophy?

Now you're just being an idiot.

Yes I know, pain sensors help the "sufferer" avoid greater danger. A doctor's slap on the bum to make the newborn cry for their first breath help with live...

Are such thing to same as God watching the pain of, say, famine from wars or "natural" catastrophes?

Good deeds would prevent certain suffering or death. Often make life better for those the deeds was directed at. So how is it the same as mass suicide?

Dude, I'm not God... So I can't prevent suffering to myself or others. Your logic there only make sense if I both hate suffering, have the power to cure it, but refuses to and chose to continue life.

That and I plan to be Bruce Wayne where my superpower is being extremely rich To fight bad guys, start a club of super heroes and all that.

 

[cynic]

you know, I think our reasoning is slightly floored ... Cynic (bell too), can u explain a possible interpretation of it for me? It doesn't seem so easy to explain. You see, when I saw that clip, like Bell I made the assumption that the youtuber/s wasn't lying. This means that the crowd saw something spectacular, and the mobile phone recording was good enough to convey what they saw . Thus trying to explain how a phone can erroneously record a light source is pointless now since the crowd actually saw something that was impressive enough ( it would be more lovelier in real life ). What i'm saying is, explaining the potential for an illusion on the mobile phone is a pointless exercise.


Or the youtuber/s are lying. Then it's a different ball game of course.

Many of the atheists are actually focusing on case 1 from what i've seen online– trying to explain the sky/elements bending the light. As far as I know, know such natural phenomena exists, that looks like that. Back to what I said before, if one assumes the youtuber isn't lying, then the best explanation would seem to be a miracle, since God is what they're looking for up there.

I have little doubt that many of those witnessing the event saw something that was not aligned with their ordinary everyday experience. Whilst I happen to believe very much in miracles, I do not happen to share your interpretation of this particular event.

Before gravitating to a supernatural interpretation of any phenomena, I believe it is important to take some time to consider the possibility of natural causation.

Nothing I saw struck me as being so exceptional, that it defied explanation by anything beyond an unusual confluence of natural events. That's not to say that it couldn't have been a miracle! (I just happen to be doubtful that it was).

Out of interest, to the best of your knowledge, has this event been duly investigated by any scientists to see if it could be naturally explained?

 

[cynic]

Now you're just being an idiot.

Yes I know, pain sensors help the "sufferer" avoid greater danger. A doctor's slap on the bum to make the newborn cry for their first breath help with live...

Are such thing to same as God watching the pain of, say, famine from wars or "natural" catastrophes?

Good deeds would prevent certain suffering or death. Often make life better for those the deeds was directed at. So how is it the same as mass suicide?

Dude, I'm not God... So I can't prevent suffering to myself or others. Your logic there only make sense if I both hate suffering, have the power to cure it, but refuses to and chose to continue life.

That and I plan to be Bruce Wayne where my superpower is being extremely rich To fight bad guys, start a club of super heroes and all that.

Okay, so now you can recognise that suffering is not necessarily wrong! I think we've made some progress!

Now, did the newborn infant understand why the surgeon smacked its bottom?

 

[grah33]

That and I plan to be Bruce Wayne where my superpower is being extremely rich To fight bad guys, start a club of super heroes and all that.

The answers to many of your questions are actually found in the scriptures. There is also the well known story of Job. Even after suffering a great deal, he is found to be at fault for complaining to God.

Regards healings, I think many more would occur if people had better characters. If a person doesn't live the life (many ask God for things but don't listen to him) , they get nothing. Not everybody can be trusted with good things.

I recall a friend once. His health (anxiety problem ) improved significantly and he attributed it to God. Then he was gone (shacked up with a girlfriend, no more church) and then he got sick again. He was jumping in and out of the church actually.

 

[luutzu]

Okay, so now you can recognise that suffering is not necessarily wrong! I think we've made some progress!

Now, did the newborn infant understand why the surgeon smacked its bottom?

Yea dude, a light tap on the bum to encourage breathing is the same as a mudslide that suffocates people in their sleep.

That reminds me of a priest I met recently. He's a jackazz.

 

[Value Collector]

No. I think it's best to continue seeking to expand human understanding of any seemingly incomprehensible phenomena.

A trivial thing should ideally be readily explicable. The purported 69 miracles were not, since they defied medical explanation. As such they cannot currently be readily dismissed as trivial.

Your continued efforts to justify your philosophical stance are becoming increasingly amusing.

What gives you the right to dictate how a deity should behave?

If there is some event, the occurrence of which, would convince you of the existence of one or more higher beings, I'd be interested to hear of it.

So far you just seem to be trotting out the fashionable arguments, currently circulating throughout the anti-theist community.

If a god or god’s existed, they would know exactly what evidence it would take to convince me, the fact that I remain unconvinced means that either these gods don’t care whether I believe, or they don’t exist.

When I say trivial, I mean there are countless claims of gods healing cataracts, arthritis and other such minor aliments, but they never seem to do anything substantial such as regrowing limbs or healing the victims of beheading etc,

So why is it that they never heal beheading victims? Or regrow limbs? And only seem to operate on the fringes of medical cures?

 

[cynic]

Yea dude, a light tap on the bum to encourage breathing is the same as a mudslide that suffocates people in their sleep.

That reminds me of a priest I met recently. He's a jackazz.

Would it be fair of me to say that the infant had no idea why the surgeon inflicted such pain, but that despite such ignorance, the painful experience was still necessary and beneficial?

And if so, would it be fair of me to argue that humans are not always capable of recognising the necessity and benevolence of their personal suffering?

And if the aforesaid is fair, then how can anyone confidently assert that the existence of human suffering is evidence against the case for the existence of god?

 

[luutzu]

The answers to many of your questions are actually found in the scriptures. There is also the well known story of Job. Even after suffering a great deal, he is found to be at fault for complaining to God.

Regards healings, I think many more would occur if people had better characters. If a person doesn't live the life (many ask God for things but don't listen to him) , they get nothing. Not everybody can be trusted with good things.

I recall a friend once. His health (anxiety problem ) improved significantly and he attributed it to God. Then he was gone (shacked up with a girlfriend, no more church) and then he got sick again. He was jumping in and out of the church actually.

Plenty of people does not live the life God instructed, yet they have everything, and then some.

Soooo religiousness, piousness or whatever... it doesn't affect God's gifts or wrath. I mean, children with cancer? wtf? What crime could a kid possibly commit to get that sentence?

If believing in God makes a person happier, live better lives, then by all means. Just I think it's a bit much to blame people's mis/fortune on whether or not God likes them and their behaviour.

My grandma recently told my mum to go back to Church and be closer to God again. Saying that it's because she abandoned God from her life that her children don't listen to her anymore.

I mean, maybe I'm the exception but my siblings are great kids. Just sometimes there are wishes that cannot be followed and obeyed. That doesn't make them bad kids, just morally strong people who also know what's right for them.

 

[Value Collector]

The answers to many of your questions are actually found in the scriptures. There is also the well known story of Job. Even after suffering a great deal, he is found to be at fault for complaining to God.

Regards healings, I think many more would occur if people had better characters. If a person doesn't live the life (many ask God for things but don't listen to him) , they get nothing. Not everybody can be trusted with good things.

I recall a friend once. His health (anxiety problem ) improved significantly and he attributed it to God. Then he was gone (shacked up with a girlfriend, no more church) and then he got sick again. He was jumping in and out of the church actually.

Again, can you show me an example of a person who regrew their limb or limbs? Or have a decapitated head reattached?

If not why not? If miracles happen, why don’t they happen in cases that would be truly impressive.

Do Christians suffer cancer at lower rates than the rest of society? I don’t think so.

 

[cynic]

If a god or god’s existed, they would know exactly what evidence it would take to convince me, the fact that I remain unconvinced means that either these gods don’t care whether I believe, or they don’t exist.

When I say trivial, I mean there are countless claims of gods healing cataracts, arthritis and other such minor aliments, but they never seem to do anything substantial such as regrowing limbs or healing the victims of beheading etc,

So why is it that they never heal beheading victims? Or regrow limbs? And only seem to operate on the fringes of medical cures?

Why should god do those things anyway? What would be the point? And who the heck is this god in which you have chosen to disbelieve?

Is he/she/it some sort of stage magician like the amazing Randi?

 

[Value Collector]

Why should god do those things anyway? What would be the point? And who the heck is this god in which you have chosen to disbelieve?

Is he/she/it some sort of stage magician like the amazing Randi?

So far I remain unconvinced any god exist, but I leave defining “god” up to the person making the claim it exists.

 

[luutzu]

Would it be fair of me to say that the infant had no idea why the surgeon inflicted such pain, but that despite such ignorance, the painful experience was still necessary and beneficial?

And if so, would it be fair of me to argue that humans are not always capable of recognising the necessity and benevolence of their personal suffering?

And if the aforesaid is fair, then how can anyone confidently assert that the existence of human suffering is evidence against the case for the existence of god?

I didn't say human suffering is evidence against the existence of God.

I said that given the vast amount of humans and their sufferings, if there is a God, he's a psychotic prick.

Why don't you try to explain why some 1 billions of God's children on Earth not having access to clean drinking water is "necessary and beneficial"? Why mudslides that kills everything in its path is God's way of being kind to those victims. etc. etc.

Suffering here is not personal mistakes encouraging lessons for future success; or a sprained ankle because you didn't wear NikeAir Max when going jogging. It's watching your infant son coughing his lung out and die because a recent war mean you cannot afford $1 of medicine that would have saved his life.

But sure, God has His own reasons for which we do not comprehend. He has a Plan for all of us... plans like most of humanity suffer

 

[cynic]

I didn't say human suffering is evidence against the existence of God.

I said that given the vast amount of humans and their sufferings, if there is a God, he's a psychotic prick.

Why don't you try to explain why some 1 billions of God's children on Earth not having access to clean drinking water is "necessary and beneficial"? Why mudslides that kills everything in its path is God's way of being kind to those victims. etc. etc.

Suffering here is not personal mistakes encouraging lessons for future success; or a sprained ankle because you didn't wear NikeAir Max when going jogging. It's watching your infant son coughing his lung out and die because a recent war mean you cannot afford $1 of medicine that would have saved his life.

But sure, God has His own reasons for which we do not comprehend. He has a Plan for all of us... plans like most of humanity suffer

Is it possible for a human to experience, necessary and beneficial, suffering, whilst being ignorant to that fact?

Your own answer to this question, as demonstrated by your responses to the newborn infant bottom smacking analogy, is clearly yes!

So when translating that analogy to the relationship between an omniscient being and human subjects of limited knowledge experience and wisdom, the possibility that all suffering may potentially have a valid purpose, the understanding of which lies beyond humanity's current level of awareness, is quite easy to entertain and difficult to entirely dismiss.

So unless you have a better argument, I shall ask you again why you choose to live and propagate, when, according to your very own perceptions, you do indeed have the power to reduce the amount of future human suffering by simply choosing to self terminate?

How is your decision to propagate the species, and continue to live, acts that clearly result in further experience of human suffering, rational and justifiable in your philosophy?

 

[grah33]

Again, can you show me an example of a person who regrew their limb or limbs? Or have a decapitated head reattached?

If not why not? If miracles happen, why don’t they happen in cases that would be truly impressive.

.

i did give an example remember. was it about a week ago? Search barry... this guy barry with the 3 new discs that came from nowhere. The woman saw him with a bent over back, then straightened and made normal. the guy was in great pain as well before. she gave me more details about a particular healing service where it happened. That's a special case (people around him that knew him saw him change). And the doctors didn't want to give him the scans (showing the 3 new discs that appeared, they were taken out before) , as they said they could get sued. I also recently uncovered more information about him (for my own interest). In that time he was attending a certain prayer meeting where I know some of those people. And they know the story well, and I know one of them who tells that story doesn't lie. Before he got cured though, from what i've learnt, he was reforming himself to be a better person. It's obviously not gonna happen to someone who can't even be bothered showing up to church once a week. side comment: i'm sure there have been many people going to these kinds of events, and finding themselves to believe readily enough after some experience, yet ditching it. i guess it's hard living the way God requires. Even the Israelites after seeing divine glory (the one off miracles in biblical history ) were very quick to ditch the covenant God made to them through Moses.