1500
rating
0
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#6589
The Problem of Evil
Status
Debating
Waiting for the next argument from the instigator.
Round will be automatically forfeited in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 20,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
1500
rating
0
debates
0.0%
won
Description
This is a casual debate about the Problem of Evil and the structure behind the argument of the existence of suffering under an omnibenevolent, omnipotent deity. This is a highly debated and complex topic and I am taking a contradictory but open stance towards this argument. I am not looking for a clear winner, but more so to have a conversational debate, however people are free to vote on who's opinion they align themselves with more. If you enjoy discussing theology and are interested in getting another stance on this particular argument feel free to join this debate.
Round 1
Con
#1
OPENING ARGUMENT
My Reason for Believing That The Popularised Christian Depiction of God Cannot Exist Alongside Suffering
To begin my argument I shall state that I believe some level of suffering is required to achieve some states of the human psyche, and that a complete and utter lack of suffering would infringe on humanities ability to persevere beyond our boundaries and achieve great feats. Some of humanities greatest philosophies were born from suffering, however, at what point does suffering cease to exist solely for human improvement, and become suffering solely for the sake of suffering itself. To give an example, exercise requires some level of suffering for a lot of the population, however, overcoming that suffering in itself will not only lead to healthier body, but a more sturdy state of mind. Now, to play a point from the other side. Would we as humans not prefer to live in a world where it was not necessary to suffer, even minimally, in order to achieve that state of mind? And would we not prefer to live in a world where exercise is more easily accessible to everyone to begin with? Is a person with an abled body, more deserving of experiencing the benefits of exercise than, for example, someone with a chronic pain condition? Or someone who experiences the symptom of paralysis? Is one man more deserving of suffering then another? If so how does one calculate the level of suffering a person is deserving of, beyond the will of the Father? This will bring me into my next point
The Will of The Father vs Suffering
The Will of The Father vs Suffering
This point will be kept more brief, as there are two more specific examples I would like to discuss separately.
It has been well established that there is an inexplicable amount of suffering in the world. From acts such as murder, rape, and greed, which you could argue, are man made. All the way to disease, natural disaster, environmental circumstances, genetic conditions, etc. Now you could argue that is impossible to create both a being that has complete free will and also will never deviate from what is considered, in Gods image, "good" or "just". That would account for why man made suffering is allowed to exist under an all powerful, all loving God. However, even if we were to simply scrap the existence of all man made suffering, it still does not account for all natural suffering. To give a simple and often used example, I have yet to receive a good answer as to why children with cancer (or any other type of terminal disease), or why animal suffering should or could exist under the Christian God.
Christianity vs Suicide
This is a highly sensitive but most important topic that I must bring attention to in this argument. The existence of suicide in itself under an all loving, all powerful god is inherently oxymoronic, and here is my reasoning.
Christianity vs Suicide
This is a highly sensitive but most important topic that I must bring attention to in this argument. The existence of suicide in itself under an all loving, all powerful god is inherently oxymoronic, and here is my reasoning.
Suicide is, to cite the definition "Suicide is the act of intentionally causing one's own death". It is a highly taboo and often even criticized act within the Christian theology, and whilst this also somewhat dependent on your own moral system, as well as which form of Christian theism you practice, it is also widely considered a sin. Whilst the Bible does not inherently state that suicide is a sin, many have interpreted that through passages such as Exodus 20:13 (Thou shalt not murder), as well as passages such as Genesis 1:26-27 and Genesis 9:6, stating that humans are created in Gods image, and therefore, giving human life inherent divine value. Many modern takes of Protestant and Evangelical theism state however that suicide is not an unforgivable sin, but that it is a grave sin nonetheless.
My point here is that if you believe that God is all powerful, all loving, and all righteous, why does he allow for humans to be put in the circumstances in which they would even consider suicide as an option to escape their suffering, then directly punish that act, although (if you believe that everything is pre determined by Gods will), he would have known that putting you in those circumstances would lead to that outcome. This would imply that God is either not, all powerful, all righteous, or all loving. If your life is created as Gods plan, that implies that God either did not have the foresight to know that your suffering would lead to suicide; he did not have the power to stop it, or he simply did not care for the outcome, all of which point away from the existence of such a God. To really drive this point home, Even if you were to argue that suicide is a forgivable sin, or is a supposed "test" from God. How does God decide who to test and who to not test, and what gives him the right to decide who should go through immense mental and physical distress simply as a test of faith, that he would then punish should you fail? Does that not point to the idea that God can pick and choose favourites?
Christianity Vs Slavery
Christianity Vs Slavery
This is once again a quite sensitive topic but one that I must alas bring up for the purpose of this discussion. To quote the definition of the word, "Slavery is the ownership of a person as propriety, especially in regards to their labour"
Now to delve into my point. The existence of slavery in itself is a great indicator of what is simply a source of punishment without reason or retribution. However slavery in itself is not what I would like to discuss, but the connotations of it within Christianity and The Bible, and what they say about Gods will.
To begin I would like to immediately bring up the passage Exodus 21:1-36. If the act of Slavery in the modern world is seen as inherently evil and immoral, then why are there direct instructions in The Bible of how to upkeep and take care of a slave. This doesn't only imply that god is okay with slavery, but that he actively endorses it. Which, once again does not seem like something an all loving, all powerful God would do.
Now, you may argue that God is actively against slavery by bringing up how he freed the Israelites from captivity in The Book of Exodus. However, that is simply not a satisfactory answer for me, and in fact, even more so implies favouritism towards God's chosen people, whilst allowing and endorsing slavery for everyone else. If so, how can you claim that God is all loving?
Closing Statement
Now, you may argue that God is actively against slavery by bringing up how he freed the Israelites from captivity in The Book of Exodus. However, that is simply not a satisfactory answer for me, and in fact, even more so implies favouritism towards God's chosen people, whilst allowing and endorsing slavery for everyone else. If so, how can you claim that God is all loving?
Closing Statement
Throughout all of the points that I have discussed, I believe that this goes to point towards one of three main, clear arguments
1. God does not exist
1. God does not exist
2. God is not all powerful, all loving, or all present, and therefore, not worth worshiping
3. God is actively pro suffering
Pro
#2
That's a rather insightful perspective; however, many people also believe in the existence of God. Personally, I estimate that over 500 million people believe in God because of miracles and unexplained mysteries, all recorded in historical chronicles and passed down to this day. Although it's impossible to pinpoint the close connection between the sacred elements of the past and present, the role and belief in God cannot be denied. Rare events like pain or head injuries cannot be attributed to divine intervention; only miracles can heal them. Supernatural elements cannot be easily obscured in photographs, and sensitive issues can be hidden, but we believe that miracles are real and that God creates those miracles, and society and humanity in general.
Round 2
Con
#3
I appreciate your side of the debate on this, however I still have to somewhat bash you on providing no sources on your arguments and going off of assumptions, guesses, and personal beliefs. Your figure of 500 million is completly made up and there is no study or research backing this estimated claim. You also claim that these miracles were historically recorded and passed down in generations to this day, however provide no sources on where these miracles were recorded, and even if you were to provide this proof using miracles from any of the scriptures or any holy books/texts, you'd be using circular narrative, which makes your argument completly void.
Now you also bring up the role of the belief in God, and that is probably your one somewhat salvageable point, however once again you provide no explanation and you do not further build your argument, simply stating that "It cannot be denied". I agree that Christianity has played a role in forming our modern society as we know it today, and the Christian theology has done a lot of good for the human society. Many of our modern justice systems are somewhat loosely based around Christian theology and so are many of our moral and ethical systems around the world. However, we also cannot ignore all of the negative things religion has brought upon the human society. Most notably the many religious wars that have been caused by Christian theology, such as The Crusades, The Thirty Years' War, The French Wars of Religion, The Taiping Rebellion, The Reconquista, etc. And that's without mentioning the centuries of scientific oppression caused by religion some of the most well known being, The Galileo Affair, The Burning of Giordano Bruno, The suppression of most anatomical studies of the human body, The Index Librorum Prohibitorum (Index of forbidden books), and to state a more modern example, The restriction of funding for stem cell research under the presidency of George W. Bush, although you could argue that this decision wasn't an inherently religious one, and more so driven by emotions and personal ethics, which do still closely tie in with religion. All of the incidents I've mentioned can be easily found online and are readily available to the public.
You also cite that rare events cannot be attributed to God, using the very broad word "pain", without further explaining. If God is in control of everything in the modern world, then should we not assume that he also has control over distributing pain? After all, he is the supposed creator and designer of the human body, and he implanted those pain receptors into our bodies. Now I'm not saying that pain is a completly useless part of the human anatomy, in fact its crucial for human survival. However if God was all loving, why would he create beings that are inherently flawed and susceptible to disease and injury, when he could instead simply create a world in which pain wasn't necessary to begin with? It leads me to conclude that the only reason that we would still have a necessity for our pain receptors under an all powerful creator was for him to have the ability to punish us through it, although you could argue that he uses this as a sort of "guidance". I also want you to further build upon your point of the idea that "only miracles can heal them", and explain exactly what you mean. Because from my point of view, you are suggesting that the whole history of the scientific development of modern medicine can simply be attributed to a "miracle" of God. Which is an entire different argument from The Problem of Evil in of itself.
Moving onto your next point of the idea that "Supernatural elements cannot be easily obscured in photographs". You once again bring up a point, then refuse to further explain or facilitate its meaning. You have provided no sources of these supposed "Photos" at all, let all alone any actual certifiable proof. This point in itself once again moves away from The Problem of Evil and creates a completly different argument on whether Supernatural phenomenon can be attributed as proof of God. I feel the same way about you mentioning how "sensitive issues can be hidden", then proceed to not name any of these issues, or provide any proof of what they are, what they entail, and how they relate to The Problem of Evil
To tackle your finishing statement that "we believe that miracles are real and that God creates those miracles, and society and humanity in general", you are simply assuming that all of the general population takes your point of view on this matter. Unfortunately this does nothing to prove or explain your point and you are simply using the idea of faith itself as an argument for Gods existence, which is once again, cyclical.
To close my statement I'd like to state that none of this is a personal attack and I don't mean any ill intent in my argument. However, I am simply bringing attention to your inability to refute any of the points I bring up. Addressing my whole text with "That's a rather insightful perspective", which does nothing to disprove my points. After which stating that "many people believe in the existence of God", which once again, is a completly unrelated statement that brings nothing to your argument. I appreciate your perspective, nevertheless you've made short, vague claims, and then provided no sources and did not build on any of your ideas.
Pro
#4
Let me add that, in fact, there are 2-3 billion believers in Christianity, and they all share an unwavering belief that God can bless and heal. We just need to not only believe in miracles, but also learn many good things that have been recorded and passed down, such as solidarity, collective love, hard work, having dreams to build a career, and the list goes on. Miracles are shown in movies, like when Jesus sacrificed himself on the cross, he appeared before the villagers with a whole body, comforting and loving them. Or, for example, Jesus had to sleep in a shed containing venomous snakes that could kill him at any moment. However, he not only survived but also tamed them. That's my valid point of view.
Religion can bring unwanted negatives, but negativity always goes hand in hand with positivity, which is why it has existed to this day. Internationally recognized religions include Buddhism, Catholicism, Protestantism, and of course, Taoism. The first point is that these religions all preach good things and bestow blessings upon people. You can see that some priests and monks wear saffron robes, and they now have many personal Facebook pages, which are used for legitimate purposes to preach and spread human values and recognition within a nation in particular and the world in general. That is, Catholicism in particular and religions in general cannot interfere with everyday events; of course, miracles cannot happen (the probability still exists, but it cannot be guaranteed). In short, religion is about belief, not blindly clinging to it.
To add to that, the so-called loose and incomplete legal system, although it is a crucial foundation for the formation of an orderly and independent system, has an incredibly wide reach. For example, imagine if a lax law, like punishing robbers with flogging or fines, were too lenient; would the death penalty make society more civilized, or in other words, more obedient? The elements closely linked to religion in The Crusades, The Thirty Years' War, The French Wars of Religion, The Taiping Rebellion, The Reconquista, etc. And that's without mentioning the centuries of scientific oppression caused by religion—some of the most well-known being: The Galileo Affair, The Burning of Giordano Bruno, The suppression of most anatomical studies of the human body, The Index Librorum Prohibitorum (Index of forbidden books), and to state a more modern example, the restriction of funding for stem cell research under the presidency of George W. Bush—I have no comment on this because it lacks sufficient detail.
God is the creator of all things, not just humans, but also animals, plants, etc., and they all have finite lives, like humans. Every living thing can experience pain, sadness, accidents, etc. However, clinging to an illogical argument like "why didn't God 'design' all species to be immortal or create as few disabled people as possible" reveals two flaws: firstly, it will disrupt all the rules, from the already fragile social order to the stalemate between life and death. If someone is affected by Agent Orange and is suffering from disability, there will be people to help them, such as building hospitals and schools to produce talented individuals to serve the nation (because each country has laws protecting people with disabilities, and this is not so much related to God here; it's just a way for us to unite and adapt to difficulties. This also complements the first point: cultivating adaptability and acceptance of one's own shortcomings). In short, disabilities and injuries are crucial buffer zones and vital arteries for the development of coping mechanisms and how humans perceive others when they are in trouble. The same applies to animals (for example, in a battalion of ants, there are always doctors who cut off the injured limbs of other ants to save their kind). I also admit that some of the points I'm making are wrong from the start.
Round 3
Not published yet
Not published yet
Round 4
Not published yet
Not published yet
No content
Looks like there is nothing here yet
:vvv brooo