God Help Me.

[Martinus]

Why would the "God allows evil OMFG" thing be problematic? Maybe God just doesn't conform to everyone's idea of good or loving (gasp!). "I don't like everything you do therefore I doubt that you exist" seems kind of lame. And not that it's terribly important to this issue but God as described in the Bible can certainly be a grade A asshole.

Fine enough but then stop with the whole "loving God" bullshit that Christards preach. If God is some sort of Cthulhu then at least own up to it.

[dps]

It's hard enough to win people over to Christ without having to educate them on quantum theory first.

Because once you teach people about science you knock out a lot of modern Christian beliefs...

There's really nothing in the hard sciences that is inherently hostile to Christian beliefs.  Arguably, the social sciences are a different story, but arguably the social sciences aren't particularly scientific in many ways either.

[Norgy]

There's really nothing in the hard sciences that is inherently hostile to Christian beliefs.  Arguably, the social sciences are a different story, but arguably the social sciences aren't particularly scientific in many ways either.

So, tell us how evolution can be reconciled with Christianity and how evil liberal unscientific social sciences can't.

[Slargos]

There's really nothing in the hard sciences that is inherently hostile to Christian beliefs.  Arguably, the social sciences are a different story, but arguably the social sciences aren't particularly scientific in many ways either.

So, tell us how evolution can be reconciled with Christianity and how evil liberal unscientific social sciences can't.

Wait, so argument by assertion and idle speculation is only a valid debate technique for atheists? 

[Norgy]

They are far better suited for constructing a hypothesis than proving it. As you well know.

Disprove evolution or GTFO.

[Slargos]

They are far better suited for constructing a hypothesis than proving it. As you well know.

Disprove evolution or GTFO.

See, it's you godless heathens who need things proved or disproved. My faith is not reliant on the particulars of Genesis.

In fact, I think the whole ID argument is a massive red herring.

Did God create Earth in literally 6 days? Awesome.

Did God set off the Big Bang and create the laws of physics? I'm fine with that, too. It would in fact be even awesomer.

Did "God" in fact have nothing to do with creation, but is simply a caretaker daemon? Fine.

I don't need to argue this point, since I am quite secure in my faith and I find it most amusing to see you folks wriggle about on the particulars. 

[Zeus]

Playin Devil's advocate for the religious folk here, but how can you people look at the human body, the precise machine of survivability and adaptability that it is, and not believe that something made it in It's image. The body has countless systems of such precision and finesse that if one thin went wrong it would die, but yet it continues to strive for life. Seems to me that it we would have to pretty lucky for our bodies to have just evolved by themselves.

I don't, of course, believe in that argument, but it's a good point.

Dude. Rotting teeth. Beer belly. Shit. Painful bowel movements. Ingrown hair and toenails. If human body is created by someone, then Parodox has better quality control.

Well, yeah. But the fact that we can GET all those... awesome things is pretty amazing.

[Ideologue]

Why would the "God allows evil OMFG" thing be problematic? Maybe God just doesn't conform to everyone's idea of good or loving (gasp!). "I don't like everything you do therefore I doubt that you exist" seems kind of lame. And not that it's terribly important to this issue but God as described in the Bible can certainly be a grade A asshole.

Obviously, the Problem of Evil only exists if you assert that God is omnibenevolent.  (Which the larger Abrahamic religions do.)

[Razgovory]

There's really nothing in the hard sciences that is inherently hostile to Christian beliefs.  Arguably, the social sciences are a different story, but arguably the social sciences aren't particularly scientific in many ways either.

So, tell us how evolution can be reconciled with Christianity and how evil liberal unscientific social sciences can't.

Read Augustine of Hippo from the 4th century.

[Neil]

Why would the "God allows evil OMFG" thing be problematic? Maybe God just doesn't conform to everyone's idea of good or loving (gasp!). "I don't like everything you do therefore I doubt that you exist" seems kind of lame. And not that it's terribly important to this issue but God as described in the Bible can certainly be a grade A asshole.

Obviously, the Problem of Evil only exists if you assert that God is omnibenevolent.  (Which the larger Abrahamic religions do.)

They assert that their god is good overall, but that good won't result for every individual.

[Norgy]

Read Augustine of Hippo from the 4th century.

I have. There is little about fossils. His chapter about Jesus and the T-Rex is great.

I suppose you meant the City of Man, City of God part. That's actually some basic pol sci there. Do you think he was an evil liberal?

[Martinus]

Playin Devil's advocate for the religious folk here, but how can you people look at the human body, the precise machine of survivability and adaptability that it is, and not believe that something made it in It's image. The body has countless systems of such precision and finesse that if one thin went wrong it would die, but yet it continues to strive for life. Seems to me that it we would have to pretty lucky for our bodies to have just evolved by themselves.

I don't, of course, believe in that argument, but it's a good point.

Dude. Rotting teeth. Beer belly. Shit. Painful bowel movements. Ingrown hair and toenails. If human body is created by someone, then Parodox has better quality control.

Well, yeah. But the fact that we can GET all those... awesome things is pretty amazing.

Not really. It's the case of "get enough monkeys with enough typewriters and eventually you get a Hamlet written". If you compare the time homo sapiens existed with the age of Earth, then compare the age of Earth with that of the solar system, and then compare the age of the solar system with the age of the universe, you will see how ridiculous it is to claim this is a part of some design or a plan.

[crazy canuck]

Why would the "God allows evil OMFG" thing be problematic? Maybe God just doesn't conform to everyone's idea of good or loving (gasp!). "I don't like everything you do therefore I doubt that you exist" seems kind of lame. And not that it's terribly important to this issue but God as described in the Bible can certainly be a grade A asshole.

It is a problem for any religion that does proclaim that God is all powerful and loving such as christianity.  It is much less a problem for religions that dont stress that latter characteristic.

[crazy canuck]

It would then be morally obligated to create that world as well.  If it intervened there, the possible world in which it didn't has failed to be created, and God has failed to live up to its moral obligation.

Again you are defining away the problem by creating contraints for an all powerful God.  You are essentially saying the any God, no matter how powerful, cannot prevent evil from existing.  Which seems to contract the notion of a God being all powerful.

In other words why does an all powerful God have any "moral obligation" to create evil.

[Ideologue]

Why would the "God allows evil OMFG" thing be problematic? Maybe God just doesn't conform to everyone's idea of good or loving (gasp!). "I don't like everything you do therefore I doubt that you exist" seems kind of lame. And not that it's terribly important to this issue but God as described in the Bible can certainly be a grade A asshole.

Obviously, the Problem of Evil only exists if you assert that God is omnibenevolent.  (Which the larger Abrahamic religions do.)

They assert that their god is good overall, but that good won't result for every individual.

That's my point: it doesn't have to, if it's logically necessary for bad outcomes to exist alongside good.

Again you are defining away the problem by creating contraints for an all powerful God.

No, I see your point, but the only alternative to a God that is constrained by logic is a God that cannot logically exist.  I think anyone should be able to reject that out of hand.