HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Religion & Spirituality » Religion (Group) » Why Does Allah Allow Huma...

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:03 PM

Why Does Allah Allow Human Suffering? For What Purpose?

From the article:

A paradox formulated long ago by Greek philosopher Epicurus asks, if God is perfectly good and omnipotent, why do we suffer? He proposed two alternative answers: Either God is not perfectly good and thus not willing to stop human suffering; or God is not powerful enough to end all the pain in the world.....

According to Islamic teachings, although human beings can grasp just a small part of reality, they are inclined to make judgments as if they perceive the whole of reality....

The Quran not only points out limited human knowledge in relation to the problem of suffering, it relates, as many philosophers do, the suffering in the world to human free will. Although Allah guides and motivates human beings to be moral, just and righteous, He also let them to be free in making their choices, which includes acting immorally and causing suffering.


To read more:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/altmuslim/2018/09/why-does-allah-allow-human-suffering-for-what-purpose/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Muslim&utm_content=49

I read replies using this seeming paradox often in the Religion Group.

173 replies, 1949 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 173 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why Does Allah Allow Human Suffering? For What Purpose? (Original post)
guillaumeb Friday OP
Cartoonist Friday #1
guillaumeb Friday #2
Cartoonist Friday #3
guillaumeb Friday #4
Fred Sanders Friday #6
trotsky Friday #8
guillaumeb Friday #9
Loki Liesmith Sunday #126
guillaumeb 18 hrs ago #149
Igel Saturday #96
marylandblue Saturday #97
Towlie Friday #5
guillaumeb Friday #15
trotsky Friday #7
guillaumeb Friday #10
trotsky Friday #11
guillaumeb Friday #13
trotsky Friday #16
guillaumeb Friday #17
Cartoonist Friday #18
guillaumeb Friday #24
Cartoonist Friday #48
guillaumeb Friday #55
Cartoonist Friday #62
guillaumeb Friday #64
trotsky Friday #21
Major Nikon 20 hrs ago #142
marylandblue Friday #58
guillaumeb Friday #60
marylandblue Friday #65
guillaumeb Friday #69
marylandblue Friday #73
guillaumeb Friday #76
marylandblue Friday #85
guillaumeb Friday #86
marylandblue Friday #87
Lordquinton Saturday #108
guillaumeb Saturday #112
marylandblue Sunday #117
marylandblue Sunday #121
MineralMan Sunday #122
Lordquinton Saturday #107
guillaumeb Saturday #111
marylandblue Sunday #119
Major Nikon 20 hrs ago #143
guillaumeb 18 hrs ago #150
Major Nikon 18 hrs ago #152
qazplm135 Friday #37
trotsky Friday #41
qazplm135 Friday #66
Voltaire2 Friday #74
qazplm135 Saturday #89
Voltaire2 Saturday #92
qazplm135 Saturday #93
Voltaire2 Saturday #94
qazplm135 Sunday #123
MineralMan Friday #12
guillaumeb Friday #14
MineralMan Friday #20
guillaumeb Friday #23
MineralMan Friday #25
guillaumeb Friday #26
MineralMan Friday #27
NeoGreen Friday #19
guillaumeb Friday #22
NeoGreen Friday #28
guillaumeb Friday #29
NeoGreen Friday #30
qazplm135 Friday #39
guillaumeb Friday #40
MineralMan Friday #43
guillaumeb Friday #49
MineralMan Friday #45
guillaumeb Friday #50
qazplm135 Friday #68
guillaumeb Friday #71
qazplm135 Friday #72
Lordquinton Saturday #110
guillaumeb Saturday #114
marylandblue Sunday #118
guillaumeb 18 hrs ago #148
Lordquinton Sunday #125
MineralMan Friday #44
trotsky Friday #31
guillaumeb Friday #32
trotsky Friday #33
guillaumeb Friday #34
trotsky Friday #35
guillaumeb Friday #36
trotsky Friday #38
MineralMan Friday #46
guillaumeb Friday #51
MineralMan Saturday #95
Mariana Friday #81
guillaumeb Friday #82
Mariana Friday #83
guillaumeb Friday #84
Mariana Friday #88
guillaumeb Saturday #98
Mariana Saturday #103
guillaumeb Saturday #106
MineralMan Friday #42
guillaumeb Friday #53
MineralMan Friday #56
guillaumeb Friday #57
MineralMan Friday #63
marylandblue Friday #47
guillaumeb Friday #52
marylandblue Friday #54
DetlefK Friday #59
guillaumeb Friday #61
DetlefK Friday #67
guillaumeb Friday #70
DetlefK Friday #75
guillaumeb Friday #77
DetlefK Saturday #91
guillaumeb Saturday #99
DetlefK Saturday #100
guillaumeb Saturday #104
DetlefK Sunday #116
guillaumeb 18 hrs ago #147
Mariana 15 hrs ago #159
marylandblue 12 hrs ago #162
DetlefK 6 hrs ago #170
malchickiwick Friday #78
guillaumeb Friday #79
malchickiwick Friday #80
Major Nikon 18 hrs ago #153
Act_of_Reparation Saturday #90
underpants Saturday #101
True Dough Saturday #102
guillaumeb Saturday #105
Act_of_Reparation Yesterday #134
Voltaire2 12 hrs ago #164
TomSlick Saturday #109
guillaumeb Saturday #113
TomSlick Saturday #115
MineralMan Sunday #120
TomSlick Sunday #128
MineralMan Sunday #130
TomSlick Sunday #131
MineralMan Sunday #132
Act_of_Reparation 18 hrs ago #145
guillaumeb 18 hrs ago #146
Act_of_Reparation 18 hrs ago #154
Voltaire2 18 hrs ago #155
Mariana 15 hrs ago #160
marylandblue Sunday #124
Voltaire2 17 hrs ago #156
marylandblue 16 hrs ago #157
Voltaire2 16 hrs ago #158
marylandblue 13 hrs ago #161
Voltaire2 12 hrs ago #163
marylandblue 12 hrs ago #166
Mariana 11 hrs ago #167
marylandblue 11 hrs ago #168
Mariana Sunday #133
MineralMan Yesterday #135
Mariana 23 hrs ago #137
MineralMan 21 hrs ago #140
Pisces Sunday #127
MineralMan Sunday #129
Pisces 23 hrs ago #136
NeoGreen 22 hrs ago #138
MineralMan 21 hrs ago #141
NeoGreen 18 hrs ago #151
Voltaire2 12 hrs ago #165
MineralMan 58 min ago #173
Act_of_Reparation 19 hrs ago #144
marylandblue 10 hrs ago #169
Act_of_Reparation 2 hrs ago #171
marylandblue 2 hrs ago #172
trotsky 21 hrs ago #139

Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:10 PM

1. Have you ever found a good answer?

I haven't. And this bit about free will doesn't excuse God from sitting idle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cartoonist (Reply #1)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:12 PM

2. 2 things:

1) I am not omniscient, and
2) I have free will.

And that is my answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #2)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:14 PM

3. I guess god forgot

He forgot to give himself free will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cartoonist (Reply #3)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:16 PM

4. I fail to see the logic behind your response. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cartoonist (Reply #3)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:23 PM

6. If not omnipresent then not God. A Demi-God for Earth?

"Free will" is always the answer to this question, all major religions.

Which is then admitting not omnipresent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #2)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:26 PM

8. Please prove #2.

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #8)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:52 PM

9. If you look at replies 1 and 2,

it is obvious that my answer in #2 is my personal view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #2)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 06:11 PM

126. A terrible answer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #126)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:25 PM

149. No, it is my answer.

If you have another, that is your answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cartoonist (Reply #1)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 10:21 AM

96. My answer is simple.

If you have a child who never has to do anything for himself, never encounters difficulty, never experiences hurt or suffering, that child grows up to be incapable. Lacking resilience, empathy, the ability to deal with any headwind or accept that the universe isn't centered around himself. They cant' take correct, they're convinced the universe is there to wipe their butts. Now, the person may seem fine for a while, all nice and outgoing living under perfect conditions, until the minimal empathy and resilience that he has is strained--maybe by being asked to do an assignment instead of some fun activity, maybe a significant other has a problem with him.

I've grown plants like this. They grow in perfect conditions. Perfect water, nutrient, sunlight, temperatures, etc. Then when you put them outside in the ground they die, even the conditions are superior to the conditions that species would normally encounter in natura. They need to be hardened off first. Cactus nurseries often grow plants to a size desirable by collectors, but if they put those plants, who normally grow exposed to 10-12 hours of intense sunlight per day in the wild, who have the capacity to withstand really challenging conditions, in the sun for just 2-3 hours they sunburn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Igel (Reply #96)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 12:16 PM

97. But you didn't create the universe or the human condition

Your analogies don't work because God created a universe in which suffering is necessary. He could have created a universe in which it is possible to grow in empathy and resilience etc., but with less or no suffering. Since he is omnipotent and omniscient, he had the power and knowledge to do so, by definition. That he didn't means he was unable, didn't know how, or was unwilling to do so.

On the other hand, your children and your plants evolved to need suffering in order to develop fully. We evolved this way, because the natural world already has suffering we can't prevent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:18 PM

5. It seems that Allah grants free will to hurricanes as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Towlie (Reply #5)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:15 PM

15. A natural weather occurence. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:25 PM

7. Straw man plus begging the question.

Why a straw man? Because the people who question religious "wisdom" are generally judging it only within the context of human existence. Children are born with debilitating conditions all the time, through no fault of their own (or their parents). They might be sentenced to a brief, painful life. For what purpose? Neither you, nor any other theist, can answer that question.

Why begging the question? The author presumes (without knowing themselves, of course) that perceiving the "whole of reality" is guaranteed to answer the queries. This is wholly unsupported.

Keep trying, gil. This is pathetic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #7)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 01:54 PM

10. I am certain that the author would be devastated by your response.

And your second paragraph demonstrates only that you misunderstood the author.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #10)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:04 PM

11. Ah yes, everyone is just too stupid to understand the brilliant logic.

Your go-to insult and response.

Too bad you can't actually counter anything I said. Guess I hit a nerve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #11)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:07 PM

13. I did not say that you were/are stupid.

I said that you misunderstood that part of the article.

And no, I will not attempt to counter what you said because you start from a position of misunderstanding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #13)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:26 PM

16. Then explain it.

Or am I too stupid for you to explain it to me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #16)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:31 PM

17. What the author said:

According to Islamic teachings, although human beings can grasp just a small part of reality, they are inclined to make judgments as if they perceive the whole of reality....


And Christian teachings agree with this framing.

So the claim is that the Creator knows more than humans could possibly know. And, with such knowledge, the Creator can see far more than you or I.

What you see as reality is limited.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #17)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:40 PM

18. No we don't

We make judgements based on our understanding of reality. Nobody, except theists, claim to know more than than what can be observed.

No one but theists make judgements based on what they do not know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cartoonist (Reply #18)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:32 PM

24. And do you agree that you and I do not know the whoe of reality?

If so, we agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #24)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:30 PM

48. I agree

but that's not what the OP says.

You are always posting stuff that doesn't support religious BS. Keep at it. Count me as one of your supporters. I love to see theists make fools of themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cartoonist (Reply #48)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:37 PM

55. Speaking of making a fool of oneself,

did you read this part, that I excerpted?

According to Islamic teachings, although human beings can grasp just a small part of reality, they are inclined to make judgments as if they perceive the whole of reality....

Keep responding. Your responses are truly as insightful as your original posts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #55)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:08 PM

62. Who is they?

Not me. Not anyone who knows there's a lot we don't understand. This guy has invented a whole group of non-thinkers and accuses everyone of belonging to that group. You're one of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cartoonist (Reply #62)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:10 PM

64. Again, so insightful.

And again, you obviously missed the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #17)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:03 PM

21. "What you see as reality is limited."

No doubt. Same with you. I don't dispute this statement and never have, so it's a straw man.

But neither you, nor the author of the article, was able to explain why this matters. You are begging the question by assuming that A) your creator exists, B) it knows everything, and C) knowing everything will explain why humans have to suffer.

All you've managed to do is take one unanswerable question and create 3 new unanswerable questions, and then blame skeptics for not accepting your "answer."

Keep trying, gil. You haven't explained a thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #17)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 01:18 PM

142. Ah yes, the old, tired and worn out, "god works in mysterious ways" excuse

The obvious problem being if god's will is unknowable, why do virtually all religionists pretend to know it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #10)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:47 PM

58. He is correct about the author's presumption

The author presumes Allah knows what he is doing and that is all for a greater good. There is no actual evidence for this, so he has to assume it based on scriptural quotes, which themselves have no evidence behind them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #58)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:03 PM

60. The author has faith.

The essential foundation.

And the responder presumes that there are no deities, a presumption based on no evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #60)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:14 PM

65. I consider lack of evidence to be "evidence" but perhaps not absolute proof

I differ from most other posters in this regard, who think you can't prove a negative.

If you have diligently searched for evidence but found none, such that the lack of evidence is itself axiomatic, than that is evidence that something doesn't exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #65)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:19 PM

69. Or, it shows that the search started from false premises. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #69)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:27 PM

73. What would be the correct premise to begin the search for God?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #73)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:54 PM

76. Faith.

And yes, I understand that you are referring to some sort of physical manifestation. But we can only project what qualities we feel are present in the Creator.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #76)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 08:11 PM

85. Sounds like a good starting point for comfirmation bias

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #85)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 08:14 PM

86. Agreed.

And deciding at any age that, with no evidence, there are no gods sounds like a good point for confirmation bias as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #86)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 08:21 PM

87. If there is no evidence for God, then the most likely conclusion

is that there is none. No faith required. Just evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #76)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 06:51 PM

108. So you just have to decide that there is a god?

You keep saying faith as if it's anything but deciding something is true inspite of a complete lack of evidence. Why do you consider this "good" and not believing something because there is no evidence "bad"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lordquinton (Reply #108)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 09:42 PM

112. In each case, for each position,

there is no evidence. And I make no claim of good or bad. If you are an atheist, I would not say that your atheism is either good or bad. And the same applies for theists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #112)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 08:47 AM

117. What else do you accept without evidence?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #112)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 10:26 AM

121. There is no evidence phlogiston exists

Last edited Sun Sep 16, 2018, 01:35 PM - Edit history (1)

Doesn't that lead to the conclusion that phlogiston most likely does not exist, rather than it does exist but we don't need to evidence to prove it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #121)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 11:02 AM

122. The Phlogiston Theory is a wonderful example of science working

to clarify things. The discovery of oxygen and its role in combustion was partly due to a paradoxical flaw in the phlogiston theory and experiments designed to explain it. Science is always looking for flaws and explanations that explain them, using experimentation and logic to find a more accurate answer. That's why science works. There is a method to it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theory

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #60)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 06:42 PM

107. Speaking of framing

Both the author and the responder in question have the same level of evidence on the topic in question, but you only label one of them as such.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lordquinton (Reply #107)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 09:38 PM

111. I have previously given my position on faith, and that no evidence is needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #111)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 09:48 AM

119. Using Lordquinton's translation stated elsewhere

You statement is a tautology. I accept without evidence the existence of God because accepting something without evidence doesn't require evidence. Is that your position?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #60)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 01:22 PM

143. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence

-- Christopher Hitchens

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #143)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:30 PM

150. Hitchens made many good points when he confined himself to politics. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #150)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:59 PM

152. Meanwhile you are making many poor fallacies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #7)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:14 PM

37. If you could

"perceive all of reality" then you are pretty much outside the laws of physics as we know them.

Your perception would ignore the speed of light barrier, and could see the macro, micro and quantum.

You probably could see at all points on a timeline (although if a photon could think/perceive, so could it along the track it traveled since time stops at c and a photon is, from it's perspective, everywhere on it's line from start to finish at the same time).

IF you could do all of those things, then yeah you probably could answer all those queries. You could read the book from front to back, simultaneously. You'd know who killed the cook and with what instrument in what room.

Of course, again, you'd have to break all the rules the universe has, and it certainly makes free will seem illusory if one can do that because no matter what free will you think you have, page 74 is coming, and you are going to kill the cook in the living room with a knife.

That's ignoring of course the possibilities of a multiverse, or an infinite, repeating universe, in which case all choices are made by all versions of you which renders no particular choice at all special (since all choices must be made by at least some of the infinite versions of you). A multiverse really, really destroys any notion of a God, or the uniqueness of reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #37)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:22 PM

41. Nope.

IF you could do all of those things, then yeah you probably could answer all those queries


There is no guarantee that knowing everything will explain why suffering exists. You are also assuming a conclusion without providing any evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #41)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:15 PM

66. Lol

Almost nothing has a "guarantee" that is not remotely a standard in logic or rational thought. It's not even scientific.

My post was a hypothetical, if you had this ability what would that mean? It would mean you could see all points on a timeline if you are literally outside the space-time continuum.

It's the same thought experiment scientists do when they imagine someone about to cross the event horizon of a black hole and time stopping for them as they watched all of eternity flash by for the rest of the universe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #66)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:28 PM

74. And yet the clear and wholly unoriginal thesis

of the article is that if only we mere mortals could perceive all of reality like Allah can, we would understand why horrible shit happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voltaire2 (Reply #74)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 12:54 AM

89. and what was my response

think first before answering instead of reflexively attacking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #89)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 07:08 AM

92. This.

“IF you could do all of those things, then yeah you probably could answer all those queries”.

Perhaps you forgot you wrote that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voltaire2 (Reply #92)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 09:00 AM

93. What's the all caps word there

And what followed after?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #93)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 09:42 AM

94. Perhaps you forgot that the op was referring

to an unperceivable (to stupid humans) moral good in all the atrocious pain and suffering in the universe? You seem to be agreeing that such a good is possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voltaire2 (Reply #94)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 11:24 AM

123. ffs

Try reading what I said, in total, one last time. Because if you can't comprehend it after that, I'm done with you.
I didn't "forget" anything, that's the second time you've basically accused me of being stupid.
You are pointless to try to debate with because you spend time responding to what you think/want the other person to have said instead of making an attempt to see what someone else is saying and that maybe they have a valid point.

Instead you go full snark and full "are you just stupid or forgetful."

So I'm done with you as long as that is your default setting.

Feel free to have the last snarky word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:05 PM

12. Converting, are you, guillaumeb?

Epicurus was right, you know...

All scripture is man-made, and suitable for confusing people. Since there is no evidence of the existence of any deities, reason is what we have to work with. I suggest using it regularly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #12)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:09 PM

14. You believe that Epicurus was correct.

Probably because it confirms what you already believed.

For further reading:

Once we have formed a view, we embrace information that confirms that view while ignoring, or rejecting, information that casts doubt on it. Confirmation bias suggests that we don’t perceive circumstances objectively. We pick out those bits of data that make us feel good because they confirm our prejudices. Thus, we may become prisoners of our assumptions. For example, some people will have a very strong inclination to dismiss any claims that marijuana may cause harm as nothing more than old-fashioned reefer madness. Some social conservatives will downplay any evidence that marijuana does not cause harm.


https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/science-choice/201504/what-is-confirmation-bias

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #14)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:02 PM

20. You cannot say what I believe, guillaumeb, nor when

I believed it. In reality, I read Epicurus before realizing that I didn't believe that deities existed. I came to that understanding at about age 20. By then, I had read many things, learned from them, and applied them to my own personal philosophy, world view and ethical compass. Those were generated after taking in more information than you can imagine.

You cannot speak to my beliefs. Only I can. Stick to your own beliefs, and speak about them, if you dare. So far, you've remained quite silent about any material statements about your beliefs.

But do not presume to tell me what I believe or how I came to my beliefs. You have no way of knowing that, except from what I write here. You are not capable of knowing my thoughts. To think you are is the very definition of blind arrogance.

Goodbye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #20)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:31 PM

23. Speaking of blind arrogance.....

it is interesting that you decided to attack rather than debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #23)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:34 PM

25. When you presume to tell others what they think or believe,

you can expect them to tell you you're full of something. You are not competent to tell others how they think or what they believe. Not in any way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #25)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:36 PM

26. And my point was on confirmation bias.

Not on what you believe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #26)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:38 PM

27. I realize that you have convinced yourself of that.

Go look again at your initial post in this subthread. See if you do not find the word "believe" in there.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=293507

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 02:52 PM

19. "Allah" doesn't allow anything...

...Allah* is a phantasm, a mere fantasy of the mind preserved on paper to infect future minds.


Allah* has not allowed anything...
Allah* does not allow anything...
Allah* will never allow anything...

Allah* does not exist in the real world.


Allah* = a placeholder for the name of any purported supernatural deity that has ever been, is being or ever will be proffered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NeoGreen (Reply #19)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:30 PM

22. The Creator understands.

Jesus understood as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #22)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:39 PM

28. And the understanding is all still of no greater effect in reality than...

...the understanding of a leprechaun.

For both leprechaun versions 2.1 and 3.0.

For all leprechaun versions from beta 0.0 to 9.99.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NeoGreen (Reply #28)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:42 PM

29. Do you understand all of reality?

Or is your understanding limited?

Assuming that the second applies, do your limitations inhibit reality, or constrain it in any way?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #29)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 03:48 PM

30. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #29)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:16 PM

39. your limitations make it impossible

for you to understand in the slightest even the concept of a being that exists outside of reality.

Yet you persist in believing that you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #39)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:18 PM

40. The Creator cannot exist outside of the reality that is a creation of the Creator.

The Creator is a part of reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MineralMan (Reply #43)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:30 PM

49. Your new favorite term?

Tired of whataboutism?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #40)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:53 PM

45. Actually, a Creator cannot exist within the reality that is its creation.

Since that reality did not exist prior to its creation, such a thing would be impossible.

Think, guillaumeb. Think!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #45)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:31 PM

50. Follow your own advice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #40)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:18 PM

68. Nonsensical

If the creator is part of reality then that creator is bound by that reality and thus cannot violate the laws of reality anymore than you or I can.

Pretty much not a God then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #68)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:22 PM

71. Your determination of the limits of the Creator.

And I accept it as only that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #71)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:23 PM

72. No the basic definition of what a god is supposed to be

Ya know, omniscient, omnipresent and responsible for creating the universe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #40)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 07:33 PM

110. Since when?

Does this reverse previous claims the creator exists independent of creation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lordquinton (Reply #110)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 09:49 PM

114. 2 different concepts.

The Creator is a part of the creation, but being the Creator, obviously existed prior to the creation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #114)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 08:50 AM

118. This sounds very traditionally Christian in a way.

Last edited Sun Sep 16, 2018, 09:38 AM - Edit history (1)

Do you believe The Word became flesh? If so, literally or metaphorically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #118)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:25 PM

148. The Word becomes flesh every time someone accepts the Word. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #114)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 05:51 PM

125. So your answer is that you get to have it both ways?

That no matter which way the question is asked, you cannot be wrong?

If so that goes a long way to explaining why that belief is so popular.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #29)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:52 PM

44. Do you understand any of reality.

Uff da!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #22)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:02 PM

31. 2 wholly unsupported claims. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #31)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:04 PM

32. Excellent counting skills. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #32)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:06 PM

33. Offsets your pitiful argumentation skills, I guess. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #33)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:08 PM

34. Notice that I made no comment on your argumentation ability. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #34)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:10 PM

35. Yes, I realize that, because you acknowledge its superiority by being unable to respond.

And instead making snide remarks about counting ability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #35)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:13 PM

36. I understand. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #36)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:15 PM

38. Thanks for agreeing with me! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #36)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:55 PM

46. Clearly, you do not. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #46)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:32 PM

51. So you disagree with trotsky?

Dissonance?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #51)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 09:53 AM

95. My reply was to you, not anyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #22)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 07:26 PM

81. Haven't you claimed

that the Creator™ is so complex that no human mind can begin to fathom it? So, how is it that you understand the Creator™ well enough to ascribe properties and behaviors to it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #81)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 07:29 PM

82. Many here understand that this is my opinion.

Thus...……. please treat it as such.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #82)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 07:34 PM

83. How can you even have an opinion

about a being that is beyond human comprehension? Did you just make stuff up to believe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #83)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 07:52 PM

84. How can some have an opinion that the Creator does not exist?

Do they simply post to fill up space?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #84)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 09:47 PM

88. Gil, you don't just posit some creator might exist.

You say it's unfathomable to human minds, and then you ascribe all kinds of traits and actions and behaviors and opinions to it. You didn't answer my question. Did you just make all that stuff up to believe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #88)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 04:02 PM

98. I assumed that you recognized that my opinion posts are just my personal view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #98)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 05:23 PM

103. Did you just make up your personal views

about nature of The Creator™, its characteristics, intentions, and opinions, and then decide to believe the stuff you made up? Seriously, how did you come to hold all these opinions about The Creator™, if The Creator™ is so unfathomable to human minds?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #103)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 06:18 PM

106. We all approach faith as individuals.

How did you come to your own conclusion about the existence of deities?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 04:50 PM

42. Allah, Yahweh, Zeus allow nothing.

They do not exist. What does not exist cannot allow. Good day, Sirrah.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #42)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:35 PM

53. Thus it is definitively decided.

To your own satisfaction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #53)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:37 PM

56. ..

..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #56)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:39 PM

57. Always your best response. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #57)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:09 PM

63. Often, it's all I need.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:09 PM

47. This theodicy rests on a logic error

God is omniscient, omnipotent, and infinitely good. Since he is infinitely good, he wants to do good for us. But he allows evil. So, the thinking goes, the evil must be for a greater good than would otherwise be possible. Therein lies the error.

God is omnipotent, there is nothing he cannot do, right? And omniscient, there is nothing he doesn't know how to do. Therefore, no matter what good actually comes from evil, God could have given us the exact same thing, only without the evil part. We don't have to know what God knows. We only have to know he is either unable (therefore not omnipotent), doesn't know how to (therefore not omniscient), or unwilling to (therefore not all-good) to prevent evil.

It's pure logic based on the supposed characteristics of God. If you want to keep all three characteristics, you are arguing 2+2=5. Now if you want to drop one of these three characteristics, then at least we'd be arguing about a God who doesn't defy logic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #47)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:34 PM

52. Your error is presuming that you understand the reason for the Creator's actions.

And all of your response is built on that initial error.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #52)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 05:36 PM

54. I don't assume anything other than the usual definition of God

The existence of evil I take as empirically indisputable. If you have some other definition of God, we can talk about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:02 PM

59. If a human being cannot make an informed judgement of reality, then why are we supposed to trust it?

If a human cannot tell whether or not there is a God or what he's like or what he wants or how to worship him or how to live your life... BECAUSE HE CANNOT GRASP THE BIGGER PICTURE... then what's left of religion?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #59)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:04 PM

61. Any human believes in a god because of faith.

And none of us can know all of reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #61)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:15 PM

67. Is human faith fallible or infallible?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #67)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:21 PM

70. Nothing human can be infallible.

Except for Trump. He has never been wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #70)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:40 PM

75. Then faith is irrelevant for the question whether God exists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #75)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 06:55 PM

77. No, faith is the belief in the Creator. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #77)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 04:46 AM

91. But you just said that it's fallible. That means, it's unreliable.

If faith is unreliable, we cannot base statements on it.
"X is true because my faith says so" doesn't work if you can't trust faith to be true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #91)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 04:08 PM

99. Faith requires belief. Any statement of faith represents a statement of belief. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #99)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 05:02 PM

100. What are your definitions of "faith" and "belief"?

I think, I already asked you that a few months ago during the course of another discussion we had. You never responded.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #100)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 06:15 PM

104. My faith in this area refers to my belief that the Creator created what we

perceive as existence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #104)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 05:42 AM

116. I don't ask what your faith and your belief are. What are your definitions of "faith" and "belief"?

Before we discuss about "faith" and "belief" we have to clarify what those words even mean.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #116)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:23 PM

147. Faith has been defined as the willing suspension of disbelief.

I agree with that.

A subset of belief can be related to faith, but belief can also encompass any philosophical position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #147)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 06:45 PM

159. Willing? Little children are indoctrinated to have faith

long before they are capable of understanding what it is they are being taught. Their faith isn't willing, it was forced upon them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #147)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 09:27 PM

162. This is also the definition of enjoying science fiction

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #147)

Tue Sep 18, 2018, 03:50 AM

170. Now we're getting somewhere.

Let's assume that the definition of faith is that faith is the willing suspension of disbelief.

The most important part here is "willing". That means, faith is a conscious act of a subject. And as the subject has free will, he is free to have faith or not to have faith.

This again bolsters my earlier argument that faith cannot be used as an argument in theological discussions: Why would somebody base his chain of reasoning on an element that depends on whoever is making the argument in this instance?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 07:02 PM

78. Allah is the same Abrahamic god worshipped by Christians. If you believe the OT, he actively ...

... and purposefully created all sorts of human misery by commanding his "chosen people" to commit genocide, infanticide, regicide, etc., and ordered his worshippers to enslave other human beings. Like all scripture, the Qur'an contradicts itself regularly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malchickiwick (Reply #78)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 07:03 PM

79. Some Christians deny that Allah is the same as the god of the Bible. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #79)

Fri Sep 14, 2018, 07:06 PM

80. *Historically illiterate Christians deny that Allah is the same as the god of the Bible. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #79)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 04:06 PM

153. Some Christians also deny that Jesus is the same as the god of the bible

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 01:59 AM

90. Drivel.

The same recycled, flaccid arguments. Over and over and over and over again. Nothing new to see here. The state of apologetics for the past, what, two hundred years?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 05:07 PM

101. Free will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #101)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 05:13 PM

102. Free Willy!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #101)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 06:16 PM

105. Yes.

The will to act freely, even if that action is harmful. If there were no free will, there could be no humans as we know them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #105)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 08:08 AM

134. Is human suffering always contingent upon the free action of other humans?

Because I got a cancer center that says otherwise. Your bumpersticker theodicy only not-answers half of the not-question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #105)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 10:06 PM

164. It is entirely likely then that you don't know any humans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 07:00 PM

109. You ask an interesting question.

One that eventually occurs to all people of faith.

My answer, I think like yours, is the recognition that human understanding is altogether too limited.

Unfortunately, the Religion Group on DU has lost its purpose as a place to discuss religious issues. Any posting raising a serious question on religion will always draw attacks on we poor ignorant people who can contemplate the idea of an understanding greater than our own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomSlick (Reply #109)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 09:47 PM

113. Agreed. An excellent repsonse.

My answer, to those who demand proof here, is to ask them to define the Creator. And of course no definition is possible. I also ask what evidence would they expect to find?

I also agree with your conclusion that discussion is difficult when theists are framed as not thinking rationally. But that contingent who do not want real discussion, or discussion that presents theism in a positive light, is small.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #113)

Sat Sep 15, 2018, 10:25 PM

115. I regret there is no place to discuss religion on DU.

We are told the Religion Group is a group and specifically not a forum, therefore a "safe place" to "Discuss religious and theological issues."

I note your frequent attempts to discuss religious issues. I also note that these are mostly met with harangues by those who attack the intelligence of believers. I admire your willingness to fight the fight. I will not be convinced by anyone whose only argument is to attack my intelligence. I am also convinced that it is not worthwhile to argue with the closed minded.

Perhaps there needs to be another group with a ground rule that no religion or lack thereof are to be dismissed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomSlick (Reply #115)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 09:55 AM

120. Here is the Statement of Purpose for the Religion Group:

Statement of Purpose
Discuss religious and theological issues. All relevant topics are permitted. Believers, non-believers, and everyone in-between are welcome.


Not all DU groups are "safe havens." There are, however, groups here where DUers can discuss specific faiths without interruption by those who do not believe. There are several such groups, which can be found by clicking "Religion & Spirituality" under Topics in the left sidebar of any page.

Discussion in the Religion Group allows for disagreement. All are welcome to participate. The basic general rules of DU apply in the Religion Group, but there is no bar against full discussion from all points of view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #120)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 08:06 PM

128. Correct.

However, on the opening page for the Group it states: "This is a group, not a forum. Groups often serve as safe havens for members who share similar interests and viewpoints. Individuals who post messages contrary to a particular group's stated purpose can be excluded from posting in that group."

Given that any posting in this Group raising a religious question is met with a series of posts attacking the poster as another mindless deist, the Religion Group is obviously not a safe space to discuss religious issues. If the Group Hosts intended the Group to serve as a place for DU members to seriously discuss religious issues, they would have stepped-in long ago.

The real purpose of the Religion Group seems to be to convince anyone who stumbles on DU that Republicans are correct when they tell people in my part of the country that Democrats are anti-religion. When I first found DU, one of the things that interested me was the happy realization that there were interesting discussions about religion issues going on between progressive people in which everyone respected the beliefs and non-beliefs of others. If when I first found DU, I had read multiple posts in the Religion Group attacking all religious people as unintelligent, I would have concluded DU was a bigoted site and moved on.

I do not find arguments challenging my intelligence to be persuasive. Also, I do not post on DU to be told that I am unintelligent. As a result, I try to make it a point not to post in this Group. I rely upon DU as a beacon of hope down here in south Arkansas. If I often posted in this Group, I would have to give up on DU. It is difficult enough to realize that many in DU are convinced that I am a hopeless moron.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomSlick (Reply #128)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 08:16 PM

130. I do not recall anyone saying anything like that to you.

Some DU groups are safe havens. Others are not. The Religion Group is not. There are other groups that discuss religion that are safe havens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #130)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 08:41 PM

131. We agree.

The Religion Group is obviously not a safe haven for the discussion of religion. As best I can tell, its purpose is to prove that Democrats are anti-religion. I am careful not to attack anyone's belief or non-belief. It is common in the Religion Group to have vicious attacks on any beliefs.

I have suggested before that DU is not a closed system. Others will find DU the same way I did. When they do, they will see postings telling them that Democrats believe that any person of faith is mentally deficient. When that occurs, we may lose not only a potential DUer but a potential Democratic voter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomSlick (Reply #131)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 08:58 PM

132. Religion is a topic that is open for debate.

This group is used for that purpose on DU. Visiting it is not in any way mandatory. The debate will continue, as it has for centuries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomSlick (Reply #131)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:17 PM

145. Wow. Fascinating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #145)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:21 PM

146. Illustrating one of the poster's points.

Undoubtedly unintentional on your part.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #146)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 04:08 PM

154. Uh-huh.

Whatever you say, man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #146)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 04:11 PM

155. His point was that cluelessness gets mocked?

Where is that stated?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomSlick (Reply #131)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 07:00 PM

160. You really should back up your statement.

Please link to a posting on DU telling anyone that "Democrats believe that any person of faith is mentally deficient."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomSlick (Reply #115)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 12:49 PM

124. Yes, there is some harsh rhetoric and ridicule in that regard

But this group is not a safe space. I'm not sure what can be done about it. Arguments here get harsher and less substantive than I would like, but nobody seems to be actually breaking the rules.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #124)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 04:17 PM

156. People break the rules here and they get dealt with

appropriately. The poster clearly does not understand the charter of this group, and is not aware of the other groups that have charters that would fit his requirements, or as is more typical for these complaints, has decided that outspoken criticism of religion should not be tolerated anywhere on this website.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voltaire2 (Reply #156)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 05:16 PM

157. I think criticism on this site goes beyond "outspoken"

into unecessary harshness and ridicule that is detrimental to dialogue. This is even justified on the basis that religion deserves such treatment. Well fine. You can do that. It just isn't dialogue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #157)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 05:57 PM

158. Do you think that there have been any attemps

at meaningful dialog? I think in fact the irreligious here have bent over backwards to coax dialog out of the religious, but have failed utterly. We are a choir of interchangeable 11th commandment robots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voltaire2 (Reply #158)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 09:10 PM

161. Yes there is that one poster, but I've seen harsh rhetoric directed at others

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #161)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 09:57 PM

163. Like this current subthread where a religionist

dropped in to tell us we were all wrecking DU?

Seems to me people bent over backwards to be polite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voltaire2 (Reply #163)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 10:11 PM

166. I didn't see any harshness and I didn't see him say we were wrecking DU

He just said we might be turning off some potential liberal religious voters by perpetuating the stereotype that liberals are anti-religious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #166)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 10:42 PM

167. He's said several demonstrably false things in this thread.

Lying isn't usually a good way to advance one's position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #167)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 11:06 PM

168. I got the sense he was offering an impressionistic viewpoint rather than any direct quote

Do you deny that some posters in this group think religion is just a bunch of dangerous nonsense?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomSlick (Reply #115)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 11:31 PM

133. That is false. There is such a place.

The Religion Group is not one of the safe haven groups, it is true ( "often" does not mean "always" ). However, the SOP of the Interfaith Group is as follows:

A safe haven that provides opportunities for people of all faiths, spiritual leanings and non-belief to discuss religious topics and events in a positive and civil manner, with an emphasis on tolerance. Criticisms of individual beliefs or non-belief, or debates about the existence of higher power(s) are not appropriate in this group.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1264

Gil knows about the Interfaith Group and its purpose, but he prefers to post here instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #133)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 09:19 AM

135. Of course, nobody has posted there since April.

What does that mean? It means that people want lively discussion and debate. The Religion Group is the busiest DU Group of all. Apparently, it is a place people want to post.

And, as has been said many times, this is not the Religious Group. It is the Religion Group. It is open to all sorts of discussions about religion, including discussions from people who are opposed to religions for one reason or another. It has never been a "safe haven" group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #135)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 10:22 AM

137. I was just correcting TomSlick's false statement

that there is no such place on DU, and reminding him that the words "often" and "always" are not synonyms.

Now, TomSlick has been enlightened about the existence of the Interfaith Group and its purpose and rules. He need no longer "regret there is no place to discuss religion on DU" as he lamented in his earlier post. Gil, of course, has known about the Interfaith Group for years, along with the several other safe haven groups for discussing religion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #137)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 12:47 PM

140. Some people like a fight, I guess.

Some people prefer that to polite agreement all the time. Not surprising.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Original post)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 06:37 PM

127. Same reason humans don't save every bug, or animal from pain and suffering. We are just so

Arrogant that we believe we deserve to be pain free. We are ants in the unversal hierarchy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #127)

Sun Sep 16, 2018, 08:11 PM

129. Some do have that as a goal.

Some Buddhists, Hindus and Jains follow the principal of Ahimsa. The goal is to do no harm to any living creature through actions words or thoughts. Its a very difficult principle, in practice. Read about it at:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahimsa

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #129)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 10:14 AM

136. This is true, but a very small percentage of religions or mankind as a whole. It is the arrogance of

Man that we value ourselves so high and separate from the animal kingdom. That we would be no different in Gods eyes as the antelope, or sea turtle, or polar bear. We are Gods ant farm, amusing to watch and put on a counter top. It is only man's ego that won't let him ponder this idea. We self inflate our importance. Maybe if we had definitive proof of intelligent life out in the universe we would be forced to reanalyze our situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #136)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 11:50 AM

138. I call foul...

...the net total of religious adherents in the three religions (i.e. Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain) mentioned in post #129 are not a "very small percentage" unless approximately 1.675 billion people or 22% of the world's population is considered "very small".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NeoGreen (Reply #138)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 12:50 PM

141. Thanks for supplying the numbers.

People never seem to think about those Asian religions, somehow. I've always been interested in Ahimsa. It's definitely different from the western religious viewpoint. Of course, it's also a very difficult principle to uphold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #141)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:41 PM

151. I would, humbly, suggest that the author of post #136...

...revisit and reconsider their definition of "arrogant" with the question "Would dismissing ~1.7 billion people as a 'very small percentage' of the world's population in-of-itself be a practical example of arrogance?"

or would hubris be a better synonym or maybe (gasp) Pride?

Don't some religious cults have something to say about Pride?
Isn't it on some list?
I thought I read that somewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NeoGreen (Reply #138)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 10:08 PM

165. Very few actively practice harm avoidance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voltaire2 (Reply #165)

Tue Sep 18, 2018, 09:15 AM

173. That is true, but the principle still exists.

Very few who adhere to any religion actually follow the entirety of that religion's advice, it seems to me. They do, however, give lip service to it. That's sort of how religion works, most likely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #136)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 03:07 PM

144. Reading stuff like this...

...makes me glad God doesn't exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #144)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 11:59 PM

169. Why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #169)

Tue Sep 18, 2018, 08:07 AM

171. You don't find anything disquieting...

...about being compared to an ant in a farm, scurrying about your short pathetic life while a bored eternal deity watches on with detached amusement as your children die of neuroblastoma?

Personally, I find chaos a more reassuring scenario. At least there's the comfort of knowing no one's watching you while you're taking a shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #171)

Tue Sep 18, 2018, 08:13 AM

172. No, I find it metaphorical for the physical universe

Which, if it could think would find us no more important than other animals, and perhaps too dangerous to the rest of creation.

"The earth has a pox called man." - Nietzche

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #127)

Mon Sep 17, 2018, 12:33 PM

139. Why do some people have to experience so much more pain than others?

Doesn't seem "arrogant" to ask, if someone set up this "hierarchy" without asking us first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread