The problem of suffering

Author: secularmerlin

Posts

Total: 157
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Stephen


.
Stephen,

YOUR DISTURBING QUOTE IN THAT JESUS, AS YAHWEH GOD INCARNATE, CREATED HOMOSEXUALS: "But Christians will deny even this while ignoring the fact the the bible makes it  clear on many occasions that god created " all things" : "

Hmmmmm, uh, let's see, it has come to mind that why would Jesus create homosexuals in the first place, and then state with specificity what is to be done with them in the aftermath: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13)

As the ONLY TRUE CHRISTIAN upon this Religion Forum, I have tried to forget about the biblical axioms where Jesus shows gay tendencies within the scriptures while upon earth, of which comes to mind at times, and where I put it out of my mind post haste.  Unfortunately in being a TRUE CHRISTIAN, I have read ALL of the Bible, therefore running across disturbing Bible narratives that I didn't need to read, and still call myself a Christian.


.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
If you say so. 
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@BrotherDThomas
I have read ALL of the Bible
And? I have read all of the Holy Bible, just in English, on several full reads, but as well all of it in three other languages. But creation did not finish in 6 periods of whatever length each. What, you think God created, retired and went fishing? So you have a Bible. I'm so impressed.  What else has God said, and still says, and to whom?

Ask poundmethomas?  Sorry, that's an empty well. My source is living water.
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@secularmerlin
These are all defacto choices. 
By an abstraction, yes, they are all choices, including choosing to not choose. But, the avoidance of choice accomplishes and changes nothing for that person sitting on the fence. I therefore conclude by practicality that it is not really a choice at all since nothing will come of it. Nothing comes of or from nothing.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@fauxlaw
The correct choice is to jump from the fence and get moving. The direction we choose to move is the indication of making another incorrect or correct choice; or, let the stream carry us wherever it will take us, or swim agains the current to achieve our desired destination.
So correct in this context is subjective. It pertains to a goal.
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@secularmerlin
A wish may be subjective, but a true goal, one that is going to be accomplished by the will and the means of the individual making it becomes very objective.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@fauxlaw
A wish may be subjective, but a true goal, one that is going to be accomplished by the will and the means of the individual making it becomes very objective.
Objective specifically means independent of human minds and opinions. A humans true goal is dependent on their mind and so definitionally subjective. 
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@secularmerlin
You are too focused on your philosophic bend. Ease up, and recognize there's a real world of whistles in the street, and alarms in your ears having naught to do with Kant, or Camus.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@fauxlaw
That's all well and good but I don't think we agree on the definition of objective. 
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@secularmerlin
That's because while you are focused on the adjective, I mean the noun. Same word, different syntax and, therefore, meaning. As I said, you're hung on philosophy. All well and good, but the discussion is on the concrete subject of suffering, and there are objective [n]  solutions.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@fauxlaw
It is true that IF the subjective goal is to minimize suffering THEN we can make (some) objective statements about how to accomplish this goal.

That being said we as humans are not responsible for all suffering and so cannot eliminate all suffering. This is no problem for any naturalistic philosophy (even one that is naturalistic out of purely pragmatism) since an unguided system leading to suffering is not a logical contradiction.
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Stephen
@fauxlaw



.
FAUXLAW, the runaway from biblical axioms, and now the #1 Bible fool upon this forum, and the #1 record holder of running away from godly posts, and who has called Jesus a LIAR many times at the expense of committing the Unpardonable Sin,

FAUXLAW, YOUR BIBLE STUPIDITY AND IGNORANCE, AND RUNAWAY STATUS OF SAME, WITHIN THIS THREAD ALONE ARE THE FOLLOWING!  LOL!


I specifically showed you within the links below that you DO NOT have free will relative to the inspired words of Jesus the Christ!
I asked you to explain where you got the notion of having free will:

You have yet to address the posts above with the topic in question, other than to RUN AWAY from them in a child like non sequitur manner! WHY? SCARED?


I have shown that Jesus creates cancer, therefore including the suffering of His Jewish creation in the aftermath in the following post:

I asked you to discuss the biblical axiom of Jesus creating cancer and the ramifications of this act in this post herewith: 

You have yet to address the posts above with the topic in question, other than to RUN AWAY from them in a child like non sequitur manner! WHY? SCARED?


FAUXLAW, seriously, why are you in this esteemed religion forum to begin with where all you do is RUNAWAY from biblical axiom discussion? This is a religion discussion forum and NOT a runaway from religion discussion forum, DO YOU UNDERSTAND BIBLE FOOL?


Now, to save what face you have left in this forum, which is zero to none, Jesus and I want you to discuss the following 2 propositions, and to save yourself from further laughable embarrassment in front of the membership and Jesus, no more running away and no more "little kid" non sequiturs, understood?

1.  Jesus created cancer and the subsequent suffering to His creation.
2.  You DO NOT have free will according to the inspired words of Jesus whereas your bible ignorance says that you do!

Which topic of the above do you want to start with first?





.

fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@BrotherDThomas
You ask why I do not respond to "biblical axiom discussion." You would notice, if you bothered to stop pounding long enough to notice, that I do respond to discussion. Your's is not discussion, which is typically on-point, direct, and BRIEF. You would not know brief if it were bunched at your crotch. Pounding pontification. No. pounding, premature efactulation. Go satisfy yourself; it's not my job.
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@secularmerlin
The problem of suffering
how do you resolve the problem of suffering?

The funny part about this is that everybody has heard the term Karma, yet nobody wants to acknowledge such a simple principle. And YET.....and yet it answers the problem of suffering so precisely and so logically and so humanely that it's hilarious nobody applies it to such a question both religious people and non religious. It seems every person understands natural cause and effect but when it comes to moral laws that apply the very same way everyone wants to play dumb.

Karma has more dynamics involved than one would assume at first glance though, because most people only focus on what they see in this one world so they are blinded by the illusion of just a single lifes experience not knowing that a soul can be subjected here on this planet several times over.....In reality the soul is eternal, reincarnation is a real factor, and the non-gender nature of the soul means that a soul that previously occupied a male embodiment can come back and occupy to suffer as a female......a rich man in one life can come back and suffer as a third world peasant subjected to starvation according to what any soul sowed during their previous occupancy. Some times Karma takes effect instantly and sometimes it takes effect in the next life, in other words it's not limited to any one lifetime.

Most people will then start to point to babies, women, "innocent" victims or even poor starving children in certain countries as a way to portray Karma or God's creation as some bad principle or failing system but babies, women and "innocent" victims are simply eternal souls inhabiting bodies and experiences that they themselves created. For example, many people might cry about a serial killer knocking off a hundred or so victims in their lifetime only to get a life sentence in prison and die a natural death or even simply get a death sentence void of all the torture they put others through....what they don't see is that the serial killer might have to come back and experience the same things they put other souls through during several lifetimes, perhaps as babies, perhaps as women, perhaps boys ect ect...according to who they chose to target. They themselves will become the target of such violence.

The far reaching principle of Karma can be so vast you never know where it is manifesting and how, it can appear in so many ways we can't even grasp. This is why we should never judge circumstances we see on this planet as being simply as they appear on the surface, because we are limited by not seeing or understanding the full scope of reality as it applies to those factors I mentioned above. One other very important factor to consider is that the earth is a place where the full scope of Karma plays out all over the world as opposed to more elevated and advanced places within creation. In other words not everywhere you sojourn will have such severe suffering taking place, because this is a low level part of creation where such low level activities take place and manifest this is where you will see a lot of turmoil.

Such a simplistic principle levels the whole playing field if one truly gets what I'm saying. Judging any particular situations then will be of no use, because again...without the understanding that each experience was somehow created through previous factors there is no way to be the judge of literally anything. Without the knowledge of seeing the whole picture there is no way to condemn any one experience.

Undeniably many people suffer and it appears to be a given that some people suffer in ways they do not necessarilly deserve.

This is exactly my point, you have absolutely no logical basis to determine such a thing if you don't understand what Karma means. All you can do is judge the effect but you have no clue to each cause.

Just as clearly not all suffering is the direct result of human actions.

Suffering will always come into play with the reality of duality (and how severe depends on where you exist), as two opposing principles collide and interact cause and effect will always be a factor. Suffering however is not the only side, wherever there is suffering the opposite side of the scale is also experienced. Creation cannot exist without contrasting forces, it is the very contrast between any principle that makes the other viable. Nonduality only exists as an experience within a singular Reality, where then you are completely present as God exists as a state of conscious awareness, transcendent of those factors.
To leave the full state of conscious awareness as the Creator is to enter creation. Each created soul left the Godhead to then enter creation, and where each soul enters is where you experience varying levels of Karma and duality.

FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,595
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@EtrnlVw

  1. Karma is not a theory as there is no credible proof to prove it, the concept of karma can only be a hypothesis(an idea)
  2. The concept of karma is flawed…and to prove it let's go to the beginning of time….
In the beginning let's say that there is person “X” and person “Y”. Since its the beginning of time and this is their first life, we can safely say that they had no bad karma debt from previous life and that they are so far not sinners.
Now In order for bad karma to take place, one must harm the others. So X has to harm Y…and this is were the problem lies…cause over here the question arises of why did person Y had to suffer? Since Y has never sinned it seems illogical for something bad to happen to him.(as karma states that good things happen to good people and bad things to bad people)
In short the flaw with karma is that it is a loop…if bad karma happens to you then you “must have done” something bad in your previous life, but in your very first life you can't sin without harming another and people can't be harmed without having previous bad karma.
3) karma makes zero sense, whats the point of punishment if you don't understand what we have done wrong, God can't be that stupid, even humans know that justice delayed is justice denied. So karma coming from previous life of which you have no memory is useless. Also one has to wonder what heinous crime did one do in his previous life or current one, to see that babies are dying from cancer or people are getting raped, sometimes more than once by the same persons.
4) some people may see karma in effect right in front of them, but I assure you it's not, the human mind has a tendency of finding patterns where there are none. It was useful in the stone age for survival from wild animals and in learning to create fire, but it's it's not that useful now.
5) karma is like santa claus completely made up so that people would behave. That is why we have real judicial system which is real even if limited in its power
CONCLUSION if you do bad things the universe won't come after you,” but our judicial system will”, and if the judicial system fails, then you would have to live with a heavy heart, or worse “get lynched by the mob” aka MOB JUSTICE …frankly I would prefer the judicial system to get me, rather than live with guilt and fear of having the mob attack me and burn me alive or hang me to a tree.

J Dante, MBBS from Smolensk State Medical University


secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@EtrnlVw
Without specific structural knowledge of what actions lead to what karmic effect this gives us ZERO actionable data. It is in fact indistinguishable from a post hoc rationalization for suffering. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@fauxlaw
A wish may be subjective, but a true goal, one that is going to be accomplished by the will and the means of the individual making it becomes very objective.
This is not objective as the noun. It is as the adjective. 
ronjs
ronjs's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 268
0
2
2
ronjs's avatar
ronjs
0
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
I'm not refering to "magic", which is just human trickery, but God can offer effective, permanent solutions to any problem He so chooses.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ronjs
God can offer effective, permanent solutions to any problem He so chooses.

Such as?  One read of the Old Testament shows that god's solution to all his own problems is to kill humans and destroy things. And encourage other humans to kill other humans when he is too bone idle to do it himself.

 Plan A didn't work so he destroyed the whole planet with a flood.  Some of his own creations didn't turn out heterosexual so he decide to wipe the populations of  five cities  from the face of the earth including babies and children.  Is this what you mean by "effective"?
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@ronjs
So then why doesn't he offer a non-magical solution to end, say, hunger? The only answer would appear to be "He doesn't want to," which then leads to one of two possible conclusions. Either he intends for people to starve to death, or he cannot actually offer these solutions. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@ronjs
I'm not refering to "magic", which is just human trickery, but God can offer effective, permanent solutions to any problem He so chooses.
Well that just begs the question why don't they to the point where any problem that isn't permanently solved a reason to question god(s) existence.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@ludofl3x
So then why doesn't he offer a non-magical solution to end, say, hunger? The only answer would appear to be "He doesn't want to," which then leads to one of two possible conclusions. Either he intends for people to starve to death, or he cannot actually offer these solutions. 
Well stated.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@ludofl3x
Either he intends for people to starve to death, or he cannot actually offer these solutions.
'He' may have been busy banging his lady friend 'Grace' ---marriage is presumed in eternality---, and hadnt noticed these issues.  Since  he and she are eternally existent, a single bang could last 5 million years, and humans only split off from apes around 7.7 million years ago, according to RNA-DNA data.




Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Or he expects his worshippers to feed the hungry, take steps to end hunger, etc. There is enough food and money to feed all the hungry.  It just doesn't happen. There are stories in the Bible where the farmers are told to leave grapes and wheat for the poor in the field. I think Ruth talks about her getting the grain for her and her mother in law. 
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
Why doesn't it happen? Is it because expecting people to do it is not, in fact, an " effective, permanent solutions to any problem [god] so chooses"? If that's the solution god chose, then why do children still starve to death?

Typically the god of the bible doesn't "expect" anything to happen, since he's the author of anything that does happen. That's the god I'm referring to, the abrahamic god of the bible. If he expects something to happen that doesn't, then he's not omniscient, and if he can't MAKE something happen like having people take care of each other, then he's not even all that powerful, and it starts to look like that god and no god at all act pretty much exactly alike. The question really is if god wanted something to be solved, he wouldn't need humans to do anything at all to solve it, he'd just DO IT. See what I'm saying?
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
If you don't believe in a god what are you doing to end hunger? Probably the same as most theists. Just enough to feel good about yourself. 
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@fauxlaw


.
FAUXLAW, the runaway from biblical axioms, and now the #1 Bible fool upon this forum, and the #1 record holder of running away from godly posts, and who has called Jesus a LIAR many times at the expense of committing the Unpardonable Sin,


FAUXLAW RUNS AWAY FROM ANOTHER BIBLICAL DISCUSSION FROM MY POST #72 REGARDING THE FACT THAT JESUS CREATED CANCER AND SUFFERING AND THE COMICAL FACT THAT HE "THINKS" HE HAS FREE WILL, WHAT'S NEW WITH THIS OUTRIGHT BIBLICAL FOOL PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN?  NOTHING!  

FAUXLAW = BIBLE DISCUSSION RUNAWAY EXTRAORDINARE!

As was expected, the Bible stupid and ignorant fool FAUXLAW couldn't discuss Jesus' TRUE modus operandi again, where he had to come up yet ANOTHER child-like excuse to RUN AWAY from biblical axioms in his ever so child-like post #73.  The comedy is the fact that FAUXLAW "thinks" he can be called a Christian when doing so, NOT!  The post in question that FAUXLAW ran away from AGAIN is shown in this link: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/5849-the-problem-of-suffering?page=3&post_number=72



FAUXLAW’s current list of RUNNING AWAY from my biblical axiomatic discussion towards him are as follows:

























The most embarrassing Bible runaway post from the Bible inept FAUXLAW is when he broke TRADESECRETS record of 24 run aways of not addressing biblical axioms that I posed to him in the following link:




FAUXLAW has certainly won the right of being the #1 Bible ignorant fool RUNAWAY upon this esteemed Religion Forum, praise Jesus!


.
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
@PW


If you don't believe in a god what are you doing to end hunger? Probably the same as most theists. Just enough to feel good about yourself. 
Completely irrelevant to the discussion, as usual.  BUt in any case, I'm doing more than God and Jesus combined. 
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
If you mean personally probably. If you mean via followers the religious have been feeding the poor for a good amount of time. Now there are agencies that are secular that work in feeding the hunger too and still it's not defeated. Food is a currency of sorts. People use it against others. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->@Polytheist-Witch 
Food is a currency of sorts. People use it against others. 
Well stated.