• 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.

God loves no one

MontagK505 said:
Isn't there supposed to be a religion that believes God exists but he/she/it is evil?
Click to expand...

Well, that brings up an interesting point: The notion of a omnibenevolent deity flies in the face of human suffering--i.e. "The Problem of Evil." How can an all-powerful and loving god allow any suffering to exist in the universe? On the other hand, an omnimalevolent deity would have the opposite problem: The Problem of Good. How can an all-powerful and evil god allow any happiness to exist in the universe?

Or am I just 'shrooming here?
 
Last edited:
Mark A. Siefert said:
Well, that brings up an interesting point: The notion of a omnibenevolent deity flies in the face of human suffering--i.e. "The Problem of Evil." How can an all-powerful and loving god allow any suffering to exist? On the other hand, an omnimalevolent deity would have the opposite problem: The Problem of Good. How can an all-powerful and evil god allow any happiness to exist in the universe?

Or am I just 'shrooming here?
Click to expand...

How can one suffer if all they know is suffering? Let someone have something good so you can rip it away when they least expect it.
 
Mark A. Siefert said:
Well, that brings up an interesting point: The notion of a omnibenevolent deity flies in the face of human suffering--i.e. "The Problem of Evil." How can an all-powerful and loving god allow any suffering to exist? On the other hand, an omnimalevolent deity would have the opposite problem: The Problem of Good. How can an all-powerful and evil god allow any happiness to exist in the universe?

Or am I just 'shrooming here?
Click to expand...

You can argue that an evil God would allow joy just to snuff it out later. Loved ones for instance, inevitably they will die usually leaving you behind. The more time you are given with them the more painful the ending can be. No, I don't think an omnimalevolent deity runs into nearly as many problems.

Lonewulf said:
My e-mail is demonwulf@gmail.com




I'm just saying.
Click to expand...

And that's going straight on the spam list I'm compiling for my evil marketing overlords.

ETA:

Lonewulf said:
Meh, that just means we have to take Adam out of the picture.
Click to expand...

You know who enjoys a good threesome with biblical figures? Satan.
 
Last edited:
Kthulhut Fhtagn said:
You can argue that an evil God would allow joy just to snuff it out later. Loved ones for instance, inevitably they will die usually leaving you behind. The more time you are given with them the more painful the ending can be. No, I don't think an omnimalevolent deity runs into nearly as many problems.
Click to expand...

But can't you say the same thing about a good god allowing evil? Allowing evil gives us mere mortals something to rally against and Good God can destroy it and justify it's existence and worship?
 
Lonewulf said:
Anyone got a time machine?
Click to expand...

I know a guy who does.

ETA:

Mark A. Siefert said:
But can't you say the same thing about a good god allowing evil? Allowing evil gives us mere mortals something to rally against and Good God can destroy it and justify it's existence and worship?
Click to expand...

You can, but that's evil in reality. A good being, by which I would extend the virtue of selflessness, would not require the suffering of others to justify itself or its worship.
 
Last edited:
Mark A. Siefert said:
But can't you say the same thing about a good god allowing evil? Allowing evil gives us mere mortals something to rally against and Good God can destroy it and justify it's existence and worship?
Click to expand...

Everyone dies, and very few people enjoy it.

I'd say that evil > good in the world.
 
Devil's advocate moment:

1. God could exist, and be a dick.
2. The eternal damnation thing could be a human construct that the dick-god doesn't take part in.
3. Even if God did try to communicate with 'the people' through bad books, like the Holy Bible, et.al., he would be limited to language and metaphors that are comprehensible to the people at their present state of sophistication.
 
quarky said:
Devil's advocate moment:

1. God could exist, and be a dick.
2. The eternal damnation thing could be a human construct that the dick-god doesn't take part in.
3. Even if God did try to communicate with 'the people' through bad books, like the Holy Bible, et.al., he would be limited to language and metaphors that are comprehensible to the people at their present state of sophistication.
Click to expand...

Why would God create people he couldn't communicate with?
 
quarky said:
Devil's advocate moment:

1. God could exist, and be a dick.
Click to expand...

Already brought up, and I handled this already. Either God doesn't exist, or He does exist and loves no one. "Being a dick" pretty much means that, as much as an abusive parent is a "dick".

2. The eternal damnation thing could be a human construct that the dick-god doesn't take part in.
Click to expand...
If you read the OP, I've already accepted these two.

3. Even if God did try to communicate with 'the people' through bad books, like the Holy Bible, et.al., he would be limited to language and metaphors that are comprehensible to the people at their present state of sophistication.
Click to expand...

Which makes God so impotent, he can't even lay down commands clearly. He would be beat out by the Code of Hammurabi. Pathetic. Someone needs to replace that guy's position; even /I/ can do better than that moronic incompetent.
 
Lonewulf said:
Which makes God so impotent, he can't even lay down commands clearly. He would be beat out by the Code of Hammurabi. Pathetic. Someone needs to replace that guy's position; even /I/ can do better than that moronic incompetent.
Click to expand...

First Church of Lonewulf anyone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom