• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Death, suffering, and religion - Fallacy

DreadNiK

A typical atypical
DreadNiK
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
909
I believe it is a fallacious argument to argue against the non-existance of, for one example, the christian god, with arguments like: "why do so many innocents suffer and die" or any variation on this.

For the simple reason that IF the religion was correct (ignoring all the other paradoxes, impossibilities and illogicalities), then death and suffering in this life is totally meaningless given the infinite afterlife. Basically, if an 'innocent' died, surely they'd go to 'heaven' which supposedly would be infinite bliss. So it is hardly a bad thing. And if someone has a life of terrible suffering, it doesn't matter too much if they get infinite bliss at the end of it all.

Obviously, this isn't an argument in favour of religion as it is riddled with worrying problems, does hell exist, therefore would it be bad for a damned soul to perish, since they go to eternal torture, whereas if they were alive they could be redeemed etc etc. But I do think it is fallacious to say 'why would god let such a bad thing happen', if that bad thing involved hundreds of people 'going to heaven'.
 
I've always wondered, where do souls come from and why do souls need to be born? Why not skip the whole life-on-earth thing, put the good souls straight to heaven and the bad ones direct to hell? Most of the alleged all-powerful, omniscient Gods claimed they knew who was going to sin and who wasn't, anyway. The life-on-earth deal is superfluous at best.

I agree with whoever said that we're reality TV for the Gods. That's assuming Gods exist.
 
Hey, no derailing my topic by pointing out how nonsensical religion is. We agree. I'm just concerned with whether the 'question of suffering' argument is fallacious.
 
DreadNiK said:
Hey, no derailing my topic by pointing out how nonsensical religion is. We agree. I'm just concerned with whether the 'question of suffering' argument is fallacious.
Click to expand...

No, it is not. It is a perfectly valid argument against.....

A Just God would not punish innocents.
 
I don't think it is a fallacy at all. The Christian God is all-pwerful, all-knowing, and all-loving. If I could make any prediction about the universe such a being would create, it would be that suffering would not exist in it. This prediction does not match our observations.

God is PERFECTLY loving, not loving in the relative way you suggest.
 
Suffering is an awfully big word, for a world which has no underlying meaning. So both suffering and God would have to be make-believe. This is not my argument by the way, merely the fallacy of yours. ;)
 
Are we talking about an all knowing all powerful god? If yes then there is no need to make innocent babies suffer is there? Insignificant? Have you ever suffered? Tell that to the parents of a baby who died a horrible prolonged death due to cancer or some such disease.
 
Dogdoctor said:
Are we talking about an all knowing all powerful god? If yes then there is no need to make innocent babies suffer is there? Insignificant? Have you ever suffered? Tell that to the parents of a baby who died a horrible prolonged death due to cancer or some such disease.
Click to expand...
Only in a world with "no purpose," does suffering not make any sense. Neither should anything else for that matter. :xwink
 
Iacchus said:
Only in a world with "no purpose," does suffering not make any sense. Neither should anything else for that matter.
Click to expand...
Not for the first time, I have no idea how you come to this conclusion. Could you give us a road map of your logic on this?

Are you suggesting that suffering only makes sense if there is a god? Sounds like an awfully mean god you have there.
 
Dogdoctor said:
Insignificant? Have you ever suffered? Tell that to the parents of a baby who died a horrible prolonged death due to cancer or some such disease.
Click to expand...

Completely insigificant. A nice appeal to emotion, there, but I think you're missing the point (well, I shouldn't speak for the original poster). Let's consider "a baby who died a horrible prolonged death due to cancer or some such disease." Say he was five years old when he died. Then compare it to an eternity of heaven. Of course, you can't do math with "eternity," so let's consider, say, a billion years. So he's spent, what--.0000007 percent of his existance in pain? Now let's consider this same baby after 10^1000000000000000000000000 years in heaven. So the baby's now spent how much of it's existance in pain? What percentage of its life has been spent suffering? You'll have to do the calculations, if you want them; my calculator can't handle numbers that small.

...how much of its existance has it spent suffering after ((10^1000000000000000000000000)^10000000000000000000000000000000)^10000000000000000000000000000 years in heaven?

(Edit: I've actually spent a while wondering how well people think the problem of evil stands up when considered in this context, so if we could avoid having this thread devolve into another Iacchus slap-fight, that would be great)
 
Last edited:
Gregory said:
So the baby's now spent how much of it's existance in pain? What percentage of its life has been spent suffering? You'll have to do the calculations, if you want them; my calculator can't handle numbers that small.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is what I'm suggesting, that maybe the suffering is there, to allude to a purpose behind existence.
 
Gregory said:
Completely insigificant. A nice appeal to emotion, there, but I think you're missing the point (well, I shouldn't speak for the original poster). Let's consider "a baby who died a horrible prolonged death due to cancer or some such disease." Say he was five years old when he died. Then compare it to an eternity of heaven. Of course, you can't do math with "eternity," so let's consider, say, a billion years. So he's spent, what--.0000007 percent of his existance in pain? Now let's consider this same baby after 10^1000000000000000000000000 years in heaven. So the baby's now spent how much of it's existance in pain? What percentage of its life has been spent suffering? You'll have to do the calculations, if you want them; my calculator can't handle numbers that small.

...how much of its existance has it spent suffering after ((10^1000000000000000000000000)^10000000000000000000000000000000)^10000000000000000000000000000 years in heaven?

(Edit: I've actually spent a while wondering how well people think the problem of evil stands up when considered in this context, so if we could avoid having this thread devolve into another Iacchus slap-fight, that would be great)
Click to expand...
Your mathematical argument can be used against you, though. Compare this child who has suffered to another who has not. A god who could have done otherwise has sentenced this child to suffer (I will use the inappropriate percentage rather than the more appropriate time measurement, to be consistent with yours) infinitely more than the child who has never suffered.

Obviously, since not all suffer, suffering cannot be a necessity for someone to make it to heaven. Your (and I know it is not just you) sweeping of five years of torture under the rug of an infinity in heaven does not make it go away. All it does, IMO, is rub salt in the wounds of the grieving parents.
 
Gregory said:
Completely insigificant. A nice appeal to emotion, there, but I think you're missing the point (well, I shouldn't speak for the original poster). Let's consider "a baby who died a horrible prolonged death due to cancer or some such disease." Say he was five years old when he died. Then compare it to an eternity of heaven. Of course, you can't do math with "eternity," so let's consider, say, a billion years. So he's spent, what--.0000007 percent of his existance in pain? Now let's consider this same baby after 10^1000000000000000000000000 years in heaven. So the baby's now spent how much of it's existance in pain? What percentage of its life has been spent suffering? You'll have to do the calculations, if you want them; my calculator can't handle numbers that small.

...how much of its existance has it spent suffering after ((10^1000000000000000000000000)^10000000000000000000000000000000)^10000000000000000000000000000 years in heaven?

(Edit: I've actually spent a while wondering how well people think the problem of evil stands up when considered in this context, so if we could avoid having this thread devolve into another Iacchus slap-fight, that would be great)
Click to expand...

Your calculations are pointless. God is supposed to love you infinitely. Even a small smudge on his character is not possible.
 
Yes, but without the propensity to feel pain, say like in the case with frostbite, then it is time to amputate. We would be dead without the capacity to feel pain in other words.
 
Or we have no answer to the "problem of evil", but it is a piece of the "mystery of God" alluded to in the book of revelation.

"But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets." Revelation 10:7 (kjv)
 
Let's compare the math for someone who, say, spends much of his first 21 years on Earth doing evil - disrespecting his parents, kicking puppies, stealing, dealing drugs, whatever. Gets killed in a shootout with the cops and spends the next ((10^1000000000000000000000000)^100000000000000000 00000000000000)^10000000000000000000000000000+ years being tortured in Hell. How does the totality of the punishment compare with the amount of evil our subject did in his life? Doesn't this lead to the conclusion that the Christian God is a cruel and sadistic b@st@rd?

One of the few points I've got to give the Catholics is the concept of Purgatory - do your time and afterwards you get to join the party. If only they'd expand it to cover mortal as well as venial sins and ditch the primitive superstition of Hell. . .
 
Genesius said:
How does the totality of the punishment compare with the amount of evil our subject did in his life? Doesn't this lead to the conclusion that the Christian God is a cruel and sadistic b@st@rd?

One of the few points I've got to give the Catholics is the concept of Purgatory - do your time and afterwards you get to join the party. If only they'd expand it to cover mortal as well as venial sins and ditch the primitive superstition of Hell. . .
Click to expand...
And, if it were simply a matter of a person not wanting to change? What would be the point of throwing him in with a bunch of folks who are capable of illustrating that they can get along? Where would be the heaven in it for them? This in my opinion, is the only reason why a distinction needs to be made between the two.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom