Could you have created a better world than god?

[IppoMakanuchi]

The more I read this thread. The more I see all of you have a problem with relativism

Without God, your moral compass is a straight line with "creates happiness" on one side and "pain and suffering on the other. But there is no marker along this line and no end on either directions

No shit. You actually think that's a bad way to look at things? Without God, humanity's only goal is progress. And without the outdated moral trapping of theism, we'd be much further down the line.

 

[7437]

God created man with the potential to be ultimately evil or ultimately good. Our greatest gift is sentience and the potential to do evil is inherent in it.

How can something be "objectively terrible" if your only definition of "Good" is the one with "happiness" on one end of the spectrum and "suffering" on the other? we have the potential for infinite happiness and potential for infinite pain and suffering. That could've been worse and could've been better. There is no objective in opinion or morality, without God.

Would you say a person who is good would watch someone beat an infant to death?

 

[Jack V Savage]

You said yourself that better is defined as less suffering.

It would be easy to create a world with no suffering--no sentient beings. Suffering is essential to our experience, really. The best we can hope for is that we can make some sense of it, though that's probably asking too much too.

 

[Pwent]

What tripe. You can't find a single flaw in this world worth correcting? Because this world is so clearly perfect.

You know what I would do to make this world just a little bit better, I'd make people like you not exist. One small step for a better war room, one giant leap for a less tainted humanity.

You severely lack intelligence if you don't understand that any choices you make would have unforeseen consequences.

You also severely lack intelligence if you cannot understand that there are things you cannot understand and that if an omniscient being existed, he would know better than you and his world would be better than yours

If a deer could change the world, there would be no wolves. But without wolves, deer would ruin their environment and starve until they are worse than they are with wolves. A deer can look at a wolf killing its baby fawn, and feel ultimate sorrow, but that doesn't mean that eliminating wolves would be ultimately good for deer as a whole.

We know that deer can't comprehend this, so only an idiot would think that there are things outside our comprehension as wel

 

[Pwent]

Would you say a person who is good would watch someone beat an infant to death?

A person who is good, yes.

But a God cannot stop them while also allowing them sentience

 

[Rusk]

I would give my creations free will, because freedom is good, and because if they fuck up the world i created for them, they would have only themselves to blame

 

[punkmother]

Since it wasn't created by an omnipotent supernatural entity, the question is moot.

But yes, at least one that makes a bit more sense.

First I'd fix the division situation and title shot requirements

i'd allow people to openly discuss fight club.

 

[ultramanhyata]

It could be a deistic god or an evil god, or as Hume put it a novice god trying his hand at world creating for the forst tims, or any other kind of god or gods.

I've always been fascinated/haunted by the idea that the being we call God is actually the divine equivalent of a precocious or petulant child. And that he/she sort of snuck away from their parents to "play house" and pretend to be a grown-up.

The Star Trek episode "The Squire of Gothos" trod this philosophical ground.

 

[7437]

A person who is good, yes.

But a God cannot stop them while also allowing them sentience

Sure he can. I can stop someone from beating an infant to death while still allowing them sentience. God should be at least as capable as a man.

 

[IppoMakanuchi]

You severely lack intelligence if you don't understand that any choices you make would have unforeseen consequences.

You're in no position to lecture me, fool. You're not a fucking intellectual dynamo.

You're a brainwashed Christian who desperately needs to validate his pathetic outmoded outlook on life.

If I wanted to create even a slightly better universe than your precious god, I'd raise your IQ to slightly over nominal. And the consequence would be, you wouldn't say as much stupid shit.

 

[MysticNinjaJay]

This is a good question and one of the reasons I am skeptical of religions like Christianity.

If I had the powers that God supposedly has (omnipotence) I would make it so that my creation is always happy, never suffers and lives forever. That is what we are supposed to get in Heaven. If God is truly as powerful as they say what is the point of life on Earth if you live in a perfect world when we die? Why can't we have that now? You can say that it is man's fault because of sin but if God knows everything he knew that Adam and Eve would eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge and disobey his order. What was the point of that? Why not just make a perfect world from the beginning without all of the mess? The logical answer is because God doesn't exist and there are alternative explanations to existence.

 

[Hans Gercmiov]

I would make myself dictator of the world and have a harem of every hot chick. And I would be immortal but with the caveat that I could commit suicide if I ever get tired of fucking hoes and ruling the world. So yeh, better than god.

 

[punkmother]

You're in no position to lecture me, fool. You're not a fucking intellectual dynamo.

You're a brainwashed Christian who desperately needs to validate his pathetic outmoded outlook on life.

If I wanted to create even a slightly better universe than your precious god, I'd raise your IQ to slightly over nominal. And the consequence would be, you wouldn't say as much stupid shit.

jordanlaughing.gif

 

[Pwent]

You're in no position to lecture me, fool. You're not a fucking intellectual dynamo.

You're a brainwashed Christian who desperately needs to validate his pathetic outmoded outlook on life.

If I wanted to create even a slightly better universe than your precious god, I'd raise your IQ to slightly over nominal. And the consequence would be, you wouldn't say as much stupid shit.

Yet you are too stupid to refute my argument

 

[Pwent]

Sure he can. I can stop someone from beating an infant to death while still allowing them sentience. God should be at least as capable as a man.

If God stopped every person from killing another innocent person, would they still have free will

 

[IppoMakanuchi]

Yet you are too stupid to refute my argument

I just fucking did.

 

[D3THRONED]

Then let me rephrase it in a way that doesn't rustle your jimmies.
All available measurable evidence points to a natural explanation for the natural world, and none points to a supernatural explanation.
As it stands, the safe conclusion is that the living world was shaped by evolutionary processes, and not an instant of creation.

No ones rustled, i actually thought this was a much better response.

 

[Pwent]

I just fucking did.

So you are saying that you have the intelligence to understand every consequence of every change you would make, and you would be able to only make decisions that do not have negative consequences

Only an idiot believes that he is capable of such a thing

 

[7437]

If God stopped every person from killing another innocent person, would they still have free will

Yes.

 

[dontsnitch]

It doesn't have to be perfect. All the argument does is make the claim the the god defined by Christians more likely doesn't exist given the evidence. That the world existing means that god created it is another things. It could be a deistic god or an evil god, or as Hume put it a novice god trying his hand at world creating for the forst tims, or any other kind of god or gods. But the god defined as good, loving and morally perfect is in conflict with the evidence.

The reason why I compared you to Guanilo is precisely because unless the world is perfect, you can level the very same accusation. You're saying that the world, as is, is in conflict with a perfect God, but any world that is not perfect can be accused of the same crime. The fact is that we can't even imagine such a world because it's nonsensical to us, but I challenge you to set up a world that is fit for a perfect God, and I assure you that it can either be improved (one less starving child, one less stubbed toe) or that it's incoherent with our logic.