Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Suffering for the Good of the World


TheRedneckProfessor

Recommended Posts

  • Super Moderator
9 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

As opposed to what, your logic based on no evidence?

My logic is based on the plainly obvious problem of suffering.  Are you suggesting that it is not evidence?  Does this suggestion of yours stem from a misunderstanding of what constitutes evidence or from your own moral depravity that delights in suffering so long as it's not yours?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Keeping this site online isn't free, so we need your support! Make a one-time donation or choose one of the recurrent patron options by clicking here.



7 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Then where do you stand on the question, Ed?

 

Did god create A & E innocent of the knowledge of good and evil, just as scripture says?

 

Yes or No?

What if innocence was a necessity for the intent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheRedneckProfessor said:

My logic is based on the plainly obvious problem of suffering.  Are you suggesting that it is not evidence?  Does this suggestion of yours stem from a misunderstanding of what constitutes evidence or from your own moral depravity that delights in suffering so long as it's not yours?  

Don’t go there… go back to where we were.  Start there.  The rest is symptoms…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Edgarcito said:

What if innocence was a necessity for the intent?

 

Don't go there... go back to where we were.

 

Start there...

 

...by answering my question.

 

 

Did god create A & E innocent of the knowledge of good and evil, just as scripture says?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, walterpthefirst said:

 

Don't go there... go back to where we were.

 

Start there...

 

...by answering my question.

 

 

Did god create A & E innocent of the knowledge of good and evil, just as scripture says?

Did you not comprehend my earlier posts that specifically mentioned innocence…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Edgarcito said:

Did you not comprehend my earlier posts that specifically mentioned innocence…

 

Just answer the question.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to stand somewhere on the issue of Adam and Eve's innocence, Ed.

 

 

If you say that god didn't create them innocent, then you are disagreeing with what scripture plainly says.

 

If you say that god did create them innocent, then you are agreeing with what scripture plainly says.

 

If you say that you don't know, then what's the point of faith?  

 

And if you say that the issue isn't relevant then why did you ask what god's goal for them was?  

 

 

Anyway, I'm logging off now and I'll expect your answer tomorrow.

 

Here's the question again.

 

Did god create A & E innocent of the knowledge of good and evil, just as scripture says?

 

Please answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
21 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Don’t go there… go back to where we were.  Start there.  The rest is symptoms…

No.  We're going there, Ed.  We started with the problem of suffering.  We have been discussing it for 10 pages.  Now, in a near-herculean effort to shift the goalposts, you have attempted to suggest that the very real, universal, demonstrable, repeatable problem of suffering is not evidence. 

 

And I want to know why.

 

Is it because you genuinely do not understand evidence any better than you understand logic?  Or is there a deeper, more debased reason buried in your psyche?

 

Please explain how my logic is "based on no evidence."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

No.  We're going there, Ed.  We started with the problem of suffering.  We have been discussing it for 10 pages.  Now, in a near-herculean effort to shift the goalposts, you have attempted to suggest that the very real, universal, demonstrable, repeatable problem of suffering is not evidence. 

 

And I want to know why.

 

Is it because you genuinely do not understand evidence any better than you understand logic?  Or is there a deeper, more debased reason buried in your psyche?

 

Please explain how my logic is "based on no evidence."

With respect to this particular avenue of discussion, suffering could be a consequence after the intent went amiss.  

 

I don't see A&E suffering while they were present with God.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How could god's intent go amiss when he knows everything and has perfect foresight?

 

When I asked you if you'd protect your children from the rattler you said Yes.

 

And you don't have god's infinite power.

 

You are just a man.

 

So why is it that you are moral and loving enough to protect your kids from harm, but god wasn't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

With respect to this particular avenue of discussion, suffering could be a consequence after the intent went amiss.  

 

I don't see A&E suffering while they were present with God.  

 

Edgarcito,

 

You seem to forget that for god the events in Eden were not unfolding in real time.

 

He knew them all perfectly beforehand.

 

So how could he be blindsided, outmanoeuvred or outflanked by Satan?

 

How could he not know in advance what Adam and Eve were thinking and feeling?

 

How is it possible for anything that happened in Eden to NOT happen according to his will?

 

Care to explain that?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  15 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

Then where do you stand on the question, Ed?

 

Did god create A & E innocent of the knowledge of good and evil, just as scripture says?

 

Yes or No?

What if innocence was a necessity for the intent?

 

 

Yesterday you asked this very important question, Edgarcito.

 

 

So what was god's intent in NOT protecting his innocent children?

 

 

Hmmm... ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
16 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

As opposed to what, your logic based on no evidence?

 

15 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

My logic is based on the plainly obvious problem of suffering.  Are you suggesting that it is not evidence?  Does this suggestion of yours stem from a misunderstanding of what constitutes evidence or from your own moral depravity that delights in suffering so long as it's not yours?  

 

42 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

With respect to this particular avenue of discussion, suffering could be a consequence after the intent went amiss.  

 

I don't see A&E suffering while they were present with God.  

Edgarcito, you have put forth the claim that my logic was not based on evidence; and I have asked you to make good on that claim.  I now expect you to do so. 

 

You can either explain why you do not consider the problem of suffering to be evidence, or you can retract your claim.  Those are the only honest options that are available to you. 

 

Anything other than one of those two options, including trying to change the subject to Adam and Eve, will only demonstrate, yet again, your dishonesty and the disingenuous intent with which you engage in bad-faith discussions.  No one would be surprised by such an outcome; but the choice of how you respond lies with you. 

 

I am waiting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

 

 

Edgarcito, you have put forth the claim that my logic was not based on evidence; and I have asked you to make good on that claim.  I now expect you to do so. 

 

You can either explain why you do not consider the problem of suffering to be evidence, or you can retract your claim.  Those are the only honest options that are available to you. 

 

Anything other than one of those two options, including trying to change the subject to Adam and Eve, will only demonstrate, yet again, your dishonesty and the disingenuous intent with which you engage in bad-faith discussions.  No one would be surprised by such an outcome; but the choice of how you respond lies with you. 

 

I am waiting...

It's pretty simple.  We were discussing intent.  And then I said what if innocence was a necessity of the intent.  And "in the beginning", we really don't know God's intent.  So now we have A&E in the garden with no suffering.  So suffering is not relevant to God's intent in this case.  He allows suffering after Eden.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
12 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

It's pretty simple.  We were discussing intent.  And then I said what if innocence was a necessity of the intent.  And "in the beginning", we really don't know God's intent.  So now we have A&E in the garden with no suffering.  So suffering is not relevant to God's intent in this case.  He allows suffering after Eden.

 

 

No, Ed.  You and Walt are discussing intent.  Your business with me precedes your discussion with Walt.  You know this; and this attempt to redirect is as dishonest as god was in the Garden. 

 

Please explain how my logic is not based on evidence.  Please explain why you do not consider suffering to be evidence.  Or retract your claim that my logic is not based on evidence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

No, Ed.  You and Walt are discussing intent.  Your business with me precedes your discussion with Walt.  You know this; and this attempt to redirect is as dishonest as god was in the Garden. 

 

Please explain how my logic is not based on evidence.  Please explain why you do not consider suffering to be evidence.  Or retract your claim that my logic is not based on evidence. 

If you want to discuss intent, suffering, and logic in the Garden, the I'd be happy to continue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
15 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

If you want to discuss intent, suffering, and logic in the Garden, the I'd be happy to continue. 

No, Ed.  Not until you make good on your claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edgarcito,

 

 

For the time being please do not answer any of my pending questions.

 

Our discussion is now on hold.

 

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

In the past 24 hours, Edgarcito has hurled personal insults, attempted to deflect and misdirect in an effort to steer the conversation away from its intended purpose, shifted every conceivable goalpost, tossed meaningless word salad, equivocated instead of addressing direct questions, and made claims which he is now refusing to support. 

 

He has shown himself to be a disingenuous coward without a shred of integrity. 

 

Lurkers, especially those who may still be riding the fence concerning religion, please take note of Edgarcito's behavior.  Please ask yourselves: If this is the best christianity has to offer, is it really a religion inspired by an all-loving and all-powerful god?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

In the past 24 hours, Edgarcito has hurled personal insults, attempted to deflect and misdirect in an effort to steer the conversation away from its intended purpose, shifted every conceivable goalpost, tossed meaningless word salad, equivocated instead of addressing direct questions, and made claims which he is now refusing to support. 

 

He has shown himself to be a disingenuous coward without a shred of integrity. 

 

Lurkers, especially those who may still be riding the fence concerning religion, please take note of Edgarcito's behavior.  Please ask yourselves: If this is the best christianity has to offer, is it really a religion inspired by an all-loving and all-powerful god?

Right, who's the actual coward that won't discuss the possibilities.  When asked about the initial intent of God, the lack of suffering in the Garden ... where the conversation went naturally through dialogue, the Prof, John, then says "no" and won't discuss those issue, maintaining the supposition that Adam and Eve's choice led to suffering is not in the bounds of the discussion.  And then John, the wonder-mod, continues to blame someone else, whether it be me or God. 

 

So lurkers, oh wait, what lurkers.  This place is dead thanks to wonder-mod John and his minions....  

 

Edit:  Man up John and finish the conversation....or just continue to be a boy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

I'm happy to continue, Ed.  Just as soon as you make good on your claim, instead of changing the subject and pretending not to understand what you're doing.  Are you afraid to support your claim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

I'm happy to continue, Ed.  Just as soon as you make good on your claim, instead of changing the subject and pretending not to understand what you're doing.  Are you afraid to support your claim?

Look John, I view Adam and Eve with God in the Garden as essentially Heaven.  I'm not making that up just for the conversation.  They essentially got kicked out of Heaven.  I don't see suffering in the Garden.  With that, there are several things we can't answer.  One, the experience/ innocence of A&E.  Two, why does God subject them to the snake.  Three, the original intent of God.  

 

Then you have to ask if humanity is separate from God or is it a manifestation thereof .....which brings more problems.  So I don't see that you and I are going to get this solved.  I do know I need to work on being a better person, and I do know a few other things I'm not going to mention.  So why don't we just leave it there and worry about those things where we might make a difference....and try to do that very carefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will not intrude on the dialogue between the Prof and Edgarcito...

 

...except to point out that the Ed is wrong about the three things he claims we cannot answer.

 

These three things can be known and understood and they can be answered.

 

However, I will say no more about them unless the Prof okays it.

 

 

Sorry for the interruption.

 

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

Look, Ed.  You claimed my logic was not based on evidence.  But my logic is based on the evidence of suffering.  Childhood cancer, sex trafficking, parasites that destroy children's eyes.  This has nothing to do with your stupid fairy tales about Adam and Eve.  My logic is based on real world evidence.  If you want to play in the sandbox with other kids who will play make-believe with you, that's fine.  But until you either explain why you don't accept real world suffering as evidence, or publicly retract your claim, I don't have a god damn thing to say to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Look, Ed.  You claimed my logic was not based on evidence.  My logic is based on the evidence of suffering.  Childhood cancer, sex trafficking, parasites that destroy children's eyes.  This has nothing to do with your stupid fairy tales about Adam and Eve.  My logic is based on real world evidence.  If you want to play in the sandbox with other kids who will play make-believe with you, that's fine.  But until you either admit my logic is based on evidence, or publicly retract your claim, I don't have a god damn thing to say to you.

Then why are you blaming "real world" evidence on something you consider imaginary??   Don't mix the two.  Blame suffering on something "real" or allow yourself to discuss Christianity or any other religion for that matter.  

 

Actually it's fine.  You do whatever is necessary for you to help your anger...  I'll just write a note to myself that John doesn't consider both courts for now....

 

For that matter, base your logic from now on on only that which is known/real.  That should really limit you.  Sorry, I couldn't help myself....lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.