What made you stop believing in God? Particularly the loving version of God? For me it was being sexually abused.
Tragedy doesn't give you an excuse for rebellion against God. That's not how it works.
>>18053569It does, if you want to claim God is good. What is good about allowing a child to be raped when you have the infinite power to stop it from happening? And then demand worship from that child? Evil and sick.
>>18053569Why did God do that to him though?
>>18053573Story time, nigga. I need more deets.
I just kinda fell off from it. There wasn't even any rebellion in it, I just did not start going to church on my own once my parents were not taking me there anymore.
>>18053579Christpedo moment
>>18053569Yes it is. Why follow a shepherd who cannot handle the responsibility of tending to his flock?
>>18053573>>18053575>>18053587God did not molest anybody
>If God is real, why bad happen?If God not real, what is bad?
>>18053562Honestly? I read the Bible. Kinda embarrassing book.
>>18053605We already know what theist's claim God's nature is, so we can point out if the world seems inconsistent with it
>>18053615>people are bad>this is supposed to be inconsistent with the bible
>>18053615>so we can point out if the world seems inconsistent with itNo you can't. You have no grounds for consistency because you have no foundation for morality. How can you tell me something is objectively a bad thing?
>>18053623Not to mention they have no grounds for laws of logic that make consistency matter.
>>18053623You seem not to be getting my point. You don't have to personally accept theism to entertain its premises - namely, that God is benevolent, that certain moral truths exist, etc. You can then argue that these premises are contradictory. At no point do you have to affirm a particular moral view yourself>>18053628This dumb argument was refuted by the traditionalist Catholic philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe (pbuh)
>>18053633>You can then argue that these premises are contradictoryYou don't (and can't) do that though, you just say if God why bad my feefees hurt>This dumb argument was refuted by the traditionalist Catholic philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe (pbuh)I always love this argument, "No, you're wrong because smart person said so, their argument is great. No I can't present their argument"
>>18053633>At no point do you have to affirm a particular moral view yourselfNo but you are affirming the only other alternative to "God", which is "No God". And "No God" presents its own dilemmas just as prominent as the Problem of Evil for Christians.What is evil? What is Good?Is morality objective or does nothing matter?If there is no higher authority telling us what's right and wrong, why is it even a bad thing to kill and eat orphans?I'm simply pointing out your own moral contradictions you're forced to wrestle with from atheism, which you seem to want to backpedal from.
>>18053639>you just say if God why bad my feefees hurtIt's incredible how callous "Christfags" are (I use quotes because you are a completely different breed of person to the real Christians one encounters IRL). This is such a demented thing to post in a thread where someone spoke about getting raped as a child.
>>18053641Those aren't really dilemmas. They're just questions. In my humility I accept that I don't have answers for them. Like the ancient Greek philosophers, I am content to suspend judgement and accept that I know nothing. That being said, nonreligious people do not seem to have trouble behaving prosocially.
>>18053621The question was why didn't god stop OP's rapist from raping him, when it was completely within his power to do so.
>>18053643Dismissing it as "callous" and "demented" reinforces rather than refuted the point that your argument is a mere irrational appeal to emotion.
>>18053647I'm objecting to your repulsive tone, not your argument.
>>18053644>Those aren't really dilemmasthey are dilemmas. How are you going to run a "secular society" if no one can agree on what is objectively right or wrong?Typically, Atheists just bite the bullet and admit they don't believe in objective morality, and 'its all a product of your society' but when you're just starting off, what is your foundation for right and wrong? Christian countries? What should the age of consent be?What do women's rights look like?
God's love just isn't compassionate in the slightest, consistent considering he made Hell and all. Morality likewise has nothing to do with alleviating or preventing suffering under a Christian nexus: it is about obeying, loving, and glorifying God.
>>18053651>How are you going to run a "secular society" if no one can agree on what is objectively right or wrong?>but when you're just starting off, what is your foundation for right and wrong? Christian countries? I agree, it's completely historically contingent. It's not really a dilemma for me since I'm not being tasked with creating a society from scratch. Also liberalism emerged precisely to govern societies where groups did not agree with each other on fundamental issues of morality (it emerged after the religious wars of early modern Europe) so in a way it answers your question. Most atheists are just unconsciously acting on Christian morality. That's fine.
>>18053646We have general answers which are applicable in general, but as for a specific case scripture says nothing but tells us the secret things belong to the Lord our God. Scripture tells us that all things work together for the good of those who love God, and to bend every knee and silence every tongue for the glory of God. There is no such thing as meaningless evil because all works in mysterious ways according to the eternal wisdom of God. He shall wipe every tear from the elect and repay every transgression of the reprobate. In all cases no evil deed shall go unpunished but is borne in full either by themselves or by Christ in their place. God is not the problem, He's the solution, and He will solve every problem in time (which is as one day with Him, for He does not tarry, but the wicked already receive their punishment both in their own experience as every moment of their lives is accursed through sin, and in God's perspective as there is no difference for Him between now and the final judgement).
>>18053664What about the raped children who go to hell
>>18053664>all of that cope to avoid saying God doesnt care if kids get raped
>>18053650You're objecting to being reminded of your guilt instead of being allowed to go your merry way in sin.
>>18053667Christfags tell rape victims they are guilty
>>18053666Is this what not caring looks like to you? Does the cross of calvary look like not caring?
>>18053669All are guilty and have fallen short of the glory of God.
>>18053670People don't really go to hell for raping children though. They go to hell for not believing in God and repenting of their sins. Hell is just the default destination for 99% of human beings. Pedophilia is no impediment to salvation if the pedo in question repents. So it's not a great consolation
>>18053662>liberalismhow's that working out for Europe and the US?there's a 2000 year old lesson here which is "Evil is not a passive force"You can enact a free and open society of liberalism, until its taken over by malevolent forces who force their will upon the populace. You need a shield from evil. A moral shield, an ideological shield, the ability to say "no" when Evil wants to be let in. Which liberal, atheist societies don't offer.
>>18053677Are you talking about Jews or something
>>18053674Wrong. Who told you people only go to hell for unbelief? To be sure, it is one of the sins which is held against them, but they shall be punished for every evil thought, every evil word, and every evil deed until they pay the last penny.
>>18053681Yeah so God sends people to hell for being born unbaptised too. It kind of makes hell as a punishment for greater crimes lose its significance
>>18053683People do not go to hell for not having grace they go to hell for sin. In the case of reprobate infants every one that goes to hell does so because they are members of a broken covenant by their father Adam.
>>18053685>reprobate infantsSo God sentences literal babies to eternal torture-rape for the sins of the father
>>18053685So god does send innocent newborn babies to burn in hell? Or are those evil babies.
>>18053679>jews>islam>communism>pedos and sodomites>perverts of all kinds>blatant racism and hatred>unequal human rights>usury>corruption>private actorsEvil takes many forms, anon.
>>18053689>>18053690No. God does not send babies to hell and the church has never taught that. Only John Calvin, a heretic from the 18th century.Babies are one of the few groups who fall under the protection of invincible ignorance.
>>18053694Obviously modernity has its share of unique evils (industrial genocide, environmental destruction, etc.) but a lot of the things you listed have rather specious links to liberalism. For instance secular liberal societies are the most anti-pedophilia societies on the planet. The age of consent in your 2,000 years of Christendom was unforgivably low by modern standards. A great deal of saints and kings would be considered moral monsters today for the ages of their wives. It seems strange to list racism as an evil alongside Jews but whatever>>18053700St Augustine wrote explicitly that infants go to hell and a belief that children go to hell was a widespread view up until the late 19th century. Pic related (from a Catholic book for children with an imprimatur)
>>18053700What's the age of accountability?
>>18053677>You need a shield from evil. A moral shield, an ideological shield, the ability to say "no" when Evil wants to be let in. Which liberal, atheist societies don't offer."Do not resist an evildoer" "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back."If you want a religion that supports resisting evil with force instead of letting God take of it (whenever he gets around to it...) I wonder if you haven't just made it up for yourself, assuming you're Christian. And if you can just sort of "make up" (or arrive at by reasoning and intuition and probably some implicit consequentialism) a morality that you feel works, why can't atheists? Atheists are just mire honest about where they get their morality than most religious people.
>>18053704The church never adopted Augustine's stance on infants, and we've had an evolving doctrine ever since. >Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" He called a child over, placed it in their midst, and said, "Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.>Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever receives one child such as this in my name receives me.>Then children were brought to him that he might lay his hands on them and pray. The disciples rebuked them, but Jesus said, "Let the children come to me, and do not prevent them; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."Jesus literally uses the example of children as perfect and innocent and worthy of heaven. This was before baptism.
>>18053573It does not. Evil is the absence of good(which is God), to do evil, is to renounce God,evil does not exist without good. God gives us free will. We choose to do evil. We suffer evils other people do us. Why is that so? There can be no justice, merit and free will if God stops every single evil. The child that got wronged will get ultimate justice if not in this life, then in the next. If atheism is true, there is not ultimate justice, since there is no punishment say for Hitler or Stalin after their deaths, and there is no consolation for those who were wronged in this life in the next. Also, if atheism is true, your morals are purely subjective anyway, so everything is allowed including raping murderer and similar actions, your morals don't matter and don't really exist with you being an atheist, they are only a convenience for you.
>>18053953A flood of verbal diarrhea
>>18053641>>18053651Those "dilemmas" are literally just the famous Christian argument which can be summed up as such:>P1: If God did not exist, I would be upset.>P2: I don't want to be upset.>C: God exists.
>>18053953>There can be no justice, merit and free will if God doesn't allow children to get raped
>>18054388Esoteric Epsteinism > Christianity
>>18054399dubs confirm this truke
>>18053562When I realized all sacred texts are at best tool of control for keeping bronze age savages in check. Not guidelines by which a functioning person in 21st century should be living.
>>18053562I don't think I ever "really" believed. I thought I had to because that's what I was told. By the time I learned that people who thought it was all bullshit existed, I immediately stopped.
>>18053689Not for the sins of the father, for the broken covenant.>>18053690There are no innocent people.>>18053700>the church has never taught that.>18th centuryThis must be bait.
God suffers with us but doesn’t always intervene; free will explanations; evil as necessary for growth, etc. It's all very confusing.
>>18053600priests do though
