Is there a God?

[Neanderthaland]

God's authority is supreme in the sense that Sauron is Lord of the Earth.

Nyet.

Correct. Neither of them are Lord of anything. Or exist.

[Kiu Ghesik]

No, God's authority is supreme. Your rejection of it is irrelevant.

God's authority is supreme in the sense that Sauron is Lord of the Earth.

He's not?

*hides symbols of the Eye*

[Godular]

To you.

No, God's authority is supreme. Your rejection of it is irrelevant.

God's authority is nonexistent.

But that will hardly change your position on the matter... thus, my rejection IS irrelevant...

to you.

[Tarsonis]

Nyet.

Correct. Neither of them are Lord of anything. Or exist.

Mmkay.

[Kowani]

Widespread acceptance, mostly.

Tyranny of the majority then?

Well, no. You don't actually need 50%+1 to accept it. Just a large enough portion to where everyone else decides it's not worth it to fight back.

Widespread acceptance, mostly.

Only insofar as it is needed to enforce its authority.

Well, yes.

[Punished UMN]

No, God's authority is supreme. Your rejection of it is irrelevant.

God's authority is nonexistent.

But that will hardly change your position on the matter... thus, my rejection IS irrelevant...

to you.

We're speaking hypothetically of course.

[Neanderthaland]

Dr. Frankenstein thought as much. I think the story is a good enough rebuttal to that idea.

Hardly. Dr. Frankenstein was human.

Yes, but like God he was an asshole to his creation. And this caused unnecessary drama.

[Cordel One]

To you.

No, God's authority is supreme. Your rejection of it is irrelevant.

Everyone says that about their god, it doesn't make it true.

[Neanderthaland]

Correct. Neither of them are Lord of anything. Or exist.

Mmkay.

Right back at you, guy who insists some weird boogeyman is the supreme ruler of everything.

[Tarsonis]

Tyranny of the majority then?

Well, no. You don't actually need 50%+1 to accept it. Just a large enough portion to where everyone else decides it's not worth it to fight back.

Only insofar as it is needed to enforce its authority.

Well, yes.

So Authority doesn't drive from the consent of the masses, it derives from power.

[Tarsonis]

Mmkay.

Right back at you, guy who insists some weird boogeyman is the supreme ruler of everything.

I don't know what you expected. You're ejecting from the conversation. Move along.

[Godular]

Heh... considering I treat all human knowledge as subjective, that's like remarking on how there appears to be an oddly large amount of water in the ocean.

No, you said God doesn't have the right to treat us like shit. But what constitutes treating us like shit? That's a matter of opinion.

Far be it from me to invoke Godwin's Law, but it would seem to me that if somebody DOESN'T consider what Hitler did to be wrong, that speaks more about them than it does about Hitler.

[Tarsonis]

No, God's authority is supreme. Your rejection of it is irrelevant.

Everyone says that about their god, it doesn't make it true.

That contributes nothing to the conversation, thanks.

[Godular]

God's authority is nonexistent.

But that will hardly change your position on the matter... thus, my rejection IS irrelevant...

to you.

We're speaking hypothetically of course.

When speaking about your god, that's pretty much the best you CAN do.

[Tarsonis]

No, you said God doesn't have the right to treat us like shit. But what constitutes treating us like shit? That's a matter of opinion.

Far be it from me to invoke Godwin's Law, but it would seem to me that if somebody DOESN'T consider what Hitler did to be wrong, that speaks more about them than it does about Hitler.

But God didn't do that.

[Punished UMN]

We're speaking hypothetically of course.

When speaking about your god, that's pretty much the best you CAN do.

Okay, cool, but we're talking about the Problem of Evil, we have to speak as though God exists in order to have a productive conversation about the Problem in question, or it's totally pointless.

[Neanderthaland]

Right back at you, guy who insists some weird boogeyman is the supreme ruler of everything.

I don't know what you expected. You're ejecting from the conversation. Move along.

You keep talking about this supreme authority as though it actually exists. But it doesn't. You've given no reason to take this seriously.

Since the topic of the thread is, "should this idea be taken seriously?" It's pretty fucking relevant.

[Tarsonis]

We're speaking hypothetically of course.

When speaking about your god, that's pretty much the best you CAN do.

Any conversation about the nature of God's authority necessarily needs to assume of a matter of course that God exists. Appealing to "Well God doesn't exist so there" is basically the atheist form of "I don't have a counter argument so I'm gonna take my ball and go home."

[Punished UMN]

I don't know what you expected. You're ejecting from the conversation. Move along.

You keep talking about this supreme authority as though it actually exists. But it doesn't. You've given no reason to take this seriously.

Since the topic of the thread is, "should this idea be taken seriously?" It's pretty fucking relevant.

When speaking about your god, that's pretty much the best you CAN do.

Okay, cool, but we're talking about the Problem of Evil, we have to speak as though God exists in order to have a productive conversation about the Problem in question, or it's totally pointless.

[Kiu Ghesik]

When speaking about your god, that's pretty much the best you CAN do.

Okay, cool, but we're talking about the Problem of Evil, we have to speak as though God exists in order to have a productive conversation about the Problem in question, or it's totally pointless.

And that's what needed to be pointed out around page... 116.

[Godular]

Far be it from me to invoke Godwin's Law, but it would seem to me that if somebody DOESN'T consider what Hitler did to be wrong, that speaks more about them than it does about Hitler.

But God didn't do that.

Naw, he did worse.

Stupid firstborn male children... having parents of that nationality.

[Cordel One]

Everyone says that about their god, it doesn't make it true.

That contributes nothing to the conversation, thanks.

What is there to contribute?
You're very welcome, Tarsonis.

[Kowani]

Well, no. You don't actually need 50%+1 to accept it. Just a large enough portion to where everyone else decides it's not worth it to fight back.


Well, yes.

So Authority doesn't drive from the consent of the masses, it derives from power.

No? If I can convince everyone into going along with my ideas through showing their superiority, I have not needed any power at all.
The same holds for group environments where people consent to listen to the authority of another, but force need not be involved. Experience is typically a more relevant factor in those sort of situations.

[Tarsonis]

I don't know what you expected. You're ejecting from the conversation. Move along.

You keep talking about this supreme authority as though it actually exists. But it doesn't. You've given no reason to take this seriously.

Since the topic of the thread is, "should this idea be taken seriously?" It's pretty fucking relevant.

It does exist irrelevant of your rejection. We were discussing the nature of God's authority and the morality of an omnipotent being. If you don't want to engage in that, then move along. Appealing to "well God doesn't exist so there" in such a discussion is the same as pulling the ejection lever. Toodles.

[Punished UMN]

So Authority doesn't drive from the consent of the masses, it derives from power.

No? If I can convince everyone into going along with my ideas through showing their superiority, I have not needed any power at all.
The same holds for group environments where people consent to listen to the authority of another, but force need not be involved. Experience is typically a more relevant factor in those sort of situations.

That's still power.