I will restate again, this is what the arguments sound like to me, I have already stated that it is assumption and not an argument, to better understand what @T_aquaticus was saying.
Yes I stated suffering is subjective, @T_aquaticus stated it was subjective also. However, it seemed to me that he made it an objective goal to end it, which is why I was questioning.
It is not a distinction without a difference because @T_aquaticus made it sound like he was arguing that suffering was different from merely feeling pain like animals do. Yes of course the universe is indifferent to what i think it should be indifferent to, it is not conscious after all. Once again, I am only assuming.
The instinct of the universe? Animals have instincts, including humans, but the universe as a whole does not.
Itâs a really, really simple concept. The thundercloud doesnât care if it sends down a thunderbolt and hits a human being. I do care.
Then my subjective emotional experiences arenât some ultimate truth. I have no problem with that. Something doesnât have to be an ultimate truth in order for it to be important to me.
By their very definition, they are subjective. Your emotions are subjective. The love you feel towards your family is subjective. The enjoyment of watching a sunset on a hiking trail at 8,000 feet is subjective. The value that each of these add to my life is subjective.
For me, the universe I see is indistinguishable from one where God does not exist. Thatâs my view. Obviously, your view is very different as are the views the vast majority of posters here. I respect all of your views, even if I donât share them. Religious freedom is one of the basic ideas that I will always defend and always celebrate. Religious belief is very important to many people, and that should be supported by all of society.
Why does there have to be an afterlife in order for this life to have meaning? Yes, I believe I will truly die (and am now probably over half way there). Iâm not going to curl up into a ball and wait to die. Iâm going to experience life and experience time with my loved ones. Thatâs meaningful to me even if I will cease to exist someday. If I better someone elseâs life in a meaningful manner, then that matters to me. If they pass on that meaning to others, that is also a positive. I would suggest that it is just as meaningful to you outside of any belief in the afterlife.
Thatâs fine. The two big theological hitters are the Problem of Suffering and the Hiddenness of God. These have been theological questions since there was theology. I donât expect you to have a good answer, and I appreciate your honesty. If you say that you have faith in Godâs plan for you, thatâs a good enough answer in my book.
Just to be clear, Iâm not here to attack Christianity or convert people to atheism. However, there are times where I think it could be productive to let people into the thoughts of an atheist. I think there are often disagreements because people donât understand where we each of us are coming from, and I think it is helpful to increase understanding.
Keep asking questions. I will do my best to answer them. Like I said, I think we could all be better off if we understand where each of us is coming from, even if we donât ultimately agree with one another.
3 Likes
I can only guess what question the title of your thread is referring to. Thus it is difficult to see how you have presented an âeasyâ resolution to it.
Why does death and suffering exist? Well it is easy to demonstrate that these are essential to life itself and the failure of these things are connected to devastating diseases. Leprosy takes away pain and cancer results when cells put their own longevity ahead of the well being of the whole body.
How do we reconcile the power and goodness of God with the existence of death and suffering? Well the above answers that question with the observation that logical consistency is the difference between reality and dream. Yes God could have created a fantasy dream world without these things but since any child can to the same, I cannot be impressed by such a thing.
This is not to say I donât see any value in what you say despite your lack of clarity with regards to the question you are talking about. I think this blame you are talking about is at the heart of the separation between man and god. For I think that relationship is one of parent and child and the only thing which can break such a relationship is when the presence of the parent in the childâs life does more harm than good. But rather than this being some idea of Satan, the responsibility is completely on the shoulders of Adam and Eve. Instead I would say that this idea of Adam and Eve is what created the adversary in the first place. Responsibility and power go hand in hand, so by passing the blame they gave this angel power over them. And I think God gave him the role of adversary to give them an alternative to blaming God for evil in the world. But better than blaming Satan for these things is accepting the responsibility for things ourselves and thus doing something about it when we can.
But clearly I do not think death and suffering will end because they are an essential part of life itself â always was and always will be. What will end are the self-destructive habits of sin, evil, despair, and the separation from God. Whether Satan will be brought down and destroyed is of far less significance than the fact that we will no longer need anything to blame for the evils of the world.
Just for clarity, it is a subjective goal.
You seem to be hung up on the idea that something has to be objective in order for it to be important. I donât believe that. Yes, objectivity can be really important in certain areas of life, but not for âmeaning of life stuffâ in my opinion. As I have said elsewhere, humans are a really crazy mix of objectivity and subjectivity. We are able to use our logic and reason to accomplish amazing things, but it is just as amazing to play with your 8 month old niece and hear her giggle. We are both objective and subjective beings, and I embrace both.
2 Likes
Thatâs exactly right, I think people have misunderstandings on both sides (myself included). I know I said the instinct of the universe because it was the only word I could think of in the moment, I really meant how it behaves with no external force acting on it.
Yes emotions are subjective, I was trying to state the the experiencing of emotions is objective not the emotion themself.
I would like to know what makes it indistinguishable from one that God does not exist in. In my opinion God doesnât exist nor does he not exist because by being God, he would transcend both. So I am just wondering what you would expect to see in a universe where God did interact with us.
Yeah religious belief is very important to some people, diversity of opinion is probably the best thing for a comprehensive society.
I didnât exactly mean that you should curl up in a ball and wait to die. If I was an atheist I would do the same thing as you. I just personally donât understand the point of it all in a grander sense because for me as much as I do love living I strive for a bigger picture for some reason. I do understand though that not all people want that.
The big theological hitter in my opinion is the problem of evil. Divine hiddenness doesnât really make sense personally because If God existed then he obviously created us with free will, and so if he then showed himself objectively we wouldnât really have the choice to believe in him or not. I also donât think the problem of evil should necessarily have an âanswerâ as in it solves all issues. There are ways to deal with it from a theist stand point though.
I understand you arenât attacking Christianity or to convert people, you donât seem to argue from a sense of anger.
2 Likes
Yeah I didnât mean that it has to be objective to be important, I just personally like truth in answering the specific questions of where do I go when I die? Why are we here? And where do I come from? I personally just donât see an answer to those in atheism as ânothingâ doesnât do it for me. Although I know some people just make peace with the I donât know and thatâs fine. I personally just want to find out more though so thatâs why I search and challenge.
Just to clarify. Are you saying that suffering denies the holiness of God? Or is the holiness of God a separate issue?
(This is not meant as leading or judgemental)
Richard
The experience of emotions is also subjective. From Dictionary.com:
subjective: existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought
No pain, no suffering. From what I understand, this is what heaven is supposed to be like. A God who claims to love us wouldnât allow the pain and suffering I see in the world.
God seems to break that rule throughout the Bible.
As a footnote, those of us in the atheist community often see a spectrum of anger and hostility amongst our peers. It is often the newly converted atheists and younger atheists that are the most hostile to believers. We tend to mellow out with age and experience. 
I canât square the idea of a loving God and a world filled with pain and suffering. Holiness is a separate topic.
I appreciate the honesty, and will try to respond in kind.
So you are saying itâs possible that the experiencing of emotions is possibly not real? Itâs subjective as in belongs to the mind, yes, but subjective means it changes depending on the person too, right? So does that mean that people donât actually experience emotion and itâs just a hallucination basically?
Yeah thatâs what theist believe heaven is. Think about it though, if everything was always joyful here on Earth, could we ever fully appreciate what we would be receiving in heaven as we would have no idea what it means to ânot sufferâ?
God never objectively revealed himself in the bible that I remember. If you are talking about the old testament, he spoke through prophets, allowing people to believe or not believe the prophets. Could you tell me what you are referring to?
Thatâs fair to say.
They are real in the sense of brain function, but they are still subjective.
I canât know how other people experience emotion, although I strongly suspect it is very similar to my experience. I also suspect that people will share many opinions.
That doesnât make any sense to me. I can appreciate my freedoms even though I have never been in jail. I can appreciate the use of my right arm even though I have neve had it amputated.
He led people through the desert for 40 years using a pillar of fire during the night and a pillar of clouds during the day. He sent manna down from heaven to feed people. The plagues sent upon Egypt are another. Jesus let Thomas touch his wounds, and Jesus appeared to many before ascending. There are many, many examples that would be enough to make me believe.
1 Like
fair enough.
Do you believe humans have a soul? Or just a material brain. If it is just a material brain, are the emotions material?
Of course you can, you have something to compare it to. Freedom and jail both exist. If there is only Good and nothing to compare it to, you couldnât appreciate it truly.
Ok, thatâs fair. However, I think the bible was God revealing himself to people through their culture. It is far more convincing to see those things today because our culture is centered a lot around science and seeing things with our eyes. For people of those times, while they still had access to science, math, and great deals of it for their time, most cultures were mystical so they expected it.
I donât believe humans have a soul in the Dualism sense. James Brown? Definitely had soul.
So yes, emotions are the product of brain function but they are subjective because only the person with the brain can experience them.
I donât have to experience jail in order to appreciate my freedom.
Also in fairness, many Christians have personal experiences that convince them of Godâs existence, and I wonât ever argue against that. I have not had such an experience, but canât discount the possibility of it in the future. At its most basic, it is very difficult to believe in something you donât believe in. I suspect that you would have a difficult time converting to Hinduism. It isnât something you could just make yourself believe in.
1 Like
Letâs ignore the trite religious answers.
How do you prevent suffering?
Every time you get injured or ill, be it by someone else, an illness or your own stupidity, you have to heal. Healing involves pain and suffering in one way or another, be it a raise in temperature, to nerve endings firing.
Medicines can mask or reduce pain but that is a human response.
pain can be a stimulant. It assists healing. It encourages a woman to push out her baby, it reminds you to treat the vulnerable area with care.
But maybe the problem is not suffering itself but the causes of it? Are illnesses unfair? Are accidents avoidable?
Illness is just part of the web of life. There is no malice involved. In the right environment bacteria can be beneficial. I am less pragmatic about viruses but , you being biologically minded , may have a better idea than me.
How can you prevent someone using violence? Or hurting someone else without infringing their freedom? DO we have the right to impose our values on others (be they religious or just moral)
Assuming God does not send suffering (basically the story of Job, but ignoring the idea that the devil started it) Suffering is just part of life, and an integral one at that.
I am a little more intruiged by the complaint about Godâs Holiness. Unless it is based on Biblical stories where God seems to hurt, punish or destroy? (That takes a lot of answering)
Richard
It isnât up to me. Iâm not all powerful, but God is described as being all powerful and creator of this universe. From what I understand, God created heaven and there is no pain and suffering in heaven, so it is doable. Is heaven going to be filled with people committing violence against other people? Is heaven going to be filled with people suffering from viral infections or cancer? Therefore, pain and suffering in this world is something God chooses to exist. It couldnât exist if God decided that it wouldnât exist. God could also heal anyone at any time. If I withheld life saving medication from a child and let them die, would I be a loving person?
My understanding is that holiness means to be set apart, but it may be more than that. For example:
Needlessly letting people suffer would call into question Godâs moral purity.
Forgive me but it looks like you either skipped or did not understand most of the last answer.
The world is amoral. It favours no one. As such it is fair. God does not impose His ideas onto us we can take thm or leave them. it is our choice. And, as I have said frequently,
If yo wan t be free to live, you have to be free to die (or suffer)
There is no morality involved
I do not worship a distant God. And Jesus is supposedly Godâs way of understanding us as much as us understanding Him. Jesus died God canât actually do that.,nor evn suffer as we do.
I know where you are coming from, but that is "âhigh Churchâ speak.
For me God is a constant and close companion. Holiness is for the hyper devout and fanatic.
But, hey, I am considered a heretic by many here.
Richard
God could have created the universe so that no one suffers. Therefore, setting up a universe that indiscriminately causes pain and suffering calls into question Godâs morality. If a car company designed a car so that it indiscriminately exploded and killed people we wouldnât give them a pass because it was indiscriminate. We would hold that car company morally culpable, especially if they decided to design the car that way.
From what I have been told, people will live free and forever in heaven without pain or suffering.
I appreciate that there are a wide spectrum of views within Christianity. I went with the âofficialâ definition, but appreciate that your views may differ.
I will repeat how?
You, of all people seem to understaand how nature works. SHow me a way to remove suffering.
You did not respond to that.except to say it isnât up to you. But I am challenging yo to put yoursef in a position where it is up to you. How would you do it? (better?)
Heaven does not conform to life as we know it. In Heaven there is no choice. You are the perfect goody two shoes. There is no pain, but there is no excitement either. There is no adrenaline rush. There is no danger. The idea is that we wonât care, but that involves a frontal labotomyâŚ
Ignore heaven. It is literally another life. Just concentrate on what you know of this one. how life interacts. What pain is useful for. Why we take risks. Why we need excitement. If there is no risk there is no pain.
Did you see Generations the Star Trek movie. The Nexus. Was it Heaven or Hell?
Richard
Is God all powerful or not? How could pain and suffering exist if God did not want it too?
Humans have cured many diseases, such as smallpox. If humans can do it, why couldnât God?
I would stop all pain and suffering. Period. With a snap of a finger I would cure all children suffering from malaria. I would cure all cancers. So on and so on. You know, do everything that human medicine is trying to do, except with 100% efficacy for all diseases since I would be all powerful. We donât think this life stinks because we can cure a serious bacterial infection with antibiotics. We certainly donât want to go back 200 years to a time when the average life expectancy was in the 40âs and child mortality was over 20%. I donât think you would withhold antibiotics from a sick child because they need excitement in their life.
Heaven is a bad place?
From the way you describe it, heaven is hell.
1 Like