Thanks, RF. My Covid test was NEGATIVE. Maybe I have something WORSE instead?

Feeling better, but slightly less coherent than normal. (Okay, I can't get any less coherent, but you get the idea. )

Will play "catch up" in this thread, soon!

GO RAMS!

This does beg the question (not in the fallacious way), of what is below absolute zero, or what came before the [Adam and Eve having a] Big Bang.

Never fear guys, I am sure all will be revealed to us shortly.

While I might phrase the bolded a bit different, the bolded summarizes my position well, e.g. God is good by definition.

As expected. It's the ultimate trump card.

I can only imagine the discussion in the pediatric oncology ward.

Q: Why is it just for my child to suffer horribly and die from a pediatric cancer?

A: Because God is good!

As you are trying to play catch up..... I thought this Bobo post raised some relevant ideas and questions for you.... and shouldn't be ignored.

Sorry to hear that.

I mean, I am glad you are better now, but the best result would have been that you were 'better' now having caught omicron and now then having Super Immunity.

I find it interesting that people who get sick now, who are double vax'd seem relieved that they did not get covid during that time of sickness and recovery. You should want it to be covid and thus you are in the best group of people going forward with regards to not worrying about covid for a long period of time.

FYP, as I would ask exactly versions of that question to my theology teachers and it always boiled down to that answer.

It may be lagtight's answer and while he isn't at all unique it's a piss poor theology course that has only that to say about the problem of evil.

Yes.

The two men who do not receive Christ as their Savior go to Hell.

Neither of my parents were Christians. I was a typical anti-religion college instructor (taught Philosophy part-time at at Golden West Community College) when I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior at the age of 30 (I'm 64 now). I ultimately saw Philosophy as a "dead-end" as far as providing meaning to life. I was impressed by the views of Carnap and Ayer and Russell with respect to moral claims being ultimately cognitively meaningless. However, the idea of moral claims being cognitively meaningless contradicted my intuition that right and wrong were real things. This intellectual impasse ultimately caused me search for Ultimate Truth. While salvation is not really an intellectual act, but rather a supernatural act brought about by God "replacing my heart of stone with a heart of flesh", it began as an intellectual quest, and ended as my receiving God's gift of salvation, as presented to me by an old college buddy of mine that I hadn't seen for years who had been an atheist who converted to Christianity. That's my short version!

I didn't take your questions as a "gotcha." Totally legit questions.

+1

See above.

That's just false.

+1

I'm almost back to "normal". (I put that in quotes, anticipating a funny reply by d2_e4.)

I should be back to exhibiting my usual "brilliance" soon! (More fodder for my friend d2_e4.)

He's not. God isn't subject to a moral standard. He is the moral standard, i.e. He is GOOD.

To say that "God is good" is similar to saying "Logic is logical" or "Water is wet." It is "built in" to His nature.


For example, it would be silly for someone to ask a logician, "I don't believe in LOGIC; please give me a rational argument why I should accept LOGIC." Any rational argument would presume the correctness of logic. That is, the correctness of LOGIC per se can't be demonstrated by LOGIC.

God is "built in" to rationality.

What about someone who has studied all the relevant writings, wishes fervently that your take on this subject was the correct one, but doesn't adopt it simply because it does not add up in his mind. He could proclaim his belief, but a good lie detector would detect the truth. In other words, emotionally he feels as you do but his thinking brain, rightly or wrongly leads him to think you are in error. He thinks that Jesus was just a man though he wishes it was otherwise. Still hell?

Except it clearly isn’t since he allows all kinds of terrible things to happen.

lagtight has made it clear that this is a literal leap of faith, not something that you necessarily should expect to be able to defend on purely logical grounds.

So yeah, lagtight definitely thinks that your hypothetical man is going to hell.

If someone was ranting like crazy, making half the posts in a thread, making constant wild assertions, totally unprovable and alogical claims, but the subject involved was ANYTHING other than religion, the poster would have been very quickly banned, although only after a few nice posters told them to get psychiatric drugs and/or mental health counseling.

Unfortunately, there is a centuries-long ethos in civilized society of "we must respect everyone's religious beliefs!", which confers upon religion a high level of social protection from treating it as what it is -- a manifestation of the psychological issues of humans, including mental illness, and a desperate desire for comfort that one's existence isn't actually forever over after they die.

Or, if you'll allow me to be meaner, a fundamentalist Christian claiming to be a logician is like a dog claiming to be a neurosurgeon.

I haven't seen a lot of respect for the beliefs

But fortuantely in a civilised society we dont generally treat people the way you seem to suggest we should.

The respect is demonstrated inherently with the fact that he's still allowed to post. Just like I said. But, whatever, take ol' lagtight out of it, there are roughly 1 billion examples I could readily provide, showing a society-wide automatic respect for religion that does not exist for ANY other social phenomenon. Churches (i.e., a religious for-profit business) with tax-exempt status, all sorts of religious exemptions for workers and students, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

A deeply idiotic (and comically Panglossian, typical for ol' chez) claim.

Why don't you go talk about the fine ways "we generally treat people" to a woman forced to carry her rapist's baby to term because "God ordained it"? In my world, the mother would have all the freedom and access needed to abort the fetus, or carry it, or whatever. In real life, however, there are these awful places called Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, and West Virginia; large US states which, as of 2019, all have one (1) abortion location in the entire state. Such a thing would obviously not exist to remotely the same degree if organized religion was not around.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/29/healt...rnd/index.html

The practice of organized religion has DEEPLY oppressed and repressed women for centuries in countless ways. Their travails would be massively eased if religion snapped out of existence. That's only like half of all people, though, so, you know, trivial.

If you believe religion can be snapped out existence then you should be very happy that in a civilised society we dont generally treat people the way you suggest we should

Why should I be forced to respect someone's objectively crazy beliefs? If I believe that the moon is made of cheese, are you obliged to respect that?

Great post.

?


who do you imagine is forcing you? is it some man in the sky?

It seems to be a rule of etiquette in society that we're supposed to respect the other person's religion. Seems silly to me. "Forced" might have been a bit strong.