Justin Schieber of Real Atheology

It means if we learn horrendous evils we experience actually constitute intimacy with Christ’s suffering, not only should we not wish those moments away, we shouldn’t intervene on others having those same sorts of experiences.

If the ruinous nature of one’s horror participation will, from the perspective of the afterlife, be defeated through one’s recognition that such moments were in fact privileged moments of intimacy with the crucified Christ, we lose the obligation to prevent horrors. #problemofevil

Yep. Damn.

i'm surprised by how low energy and farcical that whole military parade situation was. I was expecting Moscow 1945 and we got Spirit Halloween instead.

Nobody denies that the identification of fallacious reasoning is important to assessing arguments. Unfortunately for some this process is little more than an accusation that some inference vaguely resembles some statement that has been oversimplified for teaching purposes.

A concept of goodness worth nothing near our use of it requires more.

If God exists, we cannot say that God is ‘on our side’ if his goals do not take the well-being of his created creatures into consideration apart from whether or not we can, in the fullness of time, be bought off.

YouTube video by Real Atheology CORRECTING @InspiringPhilosophy on Divine Hiddenness

Our latest takes on Michael Jones of Inspiring Philosophy’s response to Divine Hiddenness.

youtu.be/breS8JOHBi8?...

YouTube video by Real Atheology CORRECTING @InspiringPhilosophy on Divine Hiddenness

Our latest takes on Michael Jones of Inspiring Philosophy’s response to Divine Hiddenness.

youtu.be/breS8JOHBi8?...

One might rationally wonder, even from the vantage point of a heavenly afterlife, if the horrors experienced were in any sense ‘worth it’ when the value of one’s life, one’s intimacy with (and overall relationship with) God had no need for them.

It’s far from clear that one’s participation specifically in horrendous evils offers a degree of intimacy greater than that of the activities associated with, say, deep friendship between persons.

That by itself would not rule out one’s rationally regretting the inclusion of those horrors in their life.
After all, going fishing with or sharing a meal with friends could also provide points of deeply meaningful identification with experiences Jesus is reported to have had.

On Madelyn McCord Adams

Suppose that horrors can end up contributing to the value of one’s life on the whole in virtue of their contribution to one’s relationship with God as offering privileged points of identification with the Christ as he suffered on the cross.

“Morally, means and ends are answerable to the demands of decency. However desirable the goal, it may be immoral to pursue it. On the other hand, if the goal is acceptable, it still cannot be pursued by any and every means.”

D.Z. Phillips

Ya got a sneak peek at my current script. ;)

It also runs too close to justifying one’s own planned participation (as perpetrator, specifically) in horrors in an effort to make one’s life ‘worth it’.

It’s also odd that she sees so much value in identifying with the tragic part of Jesus’ life. Could not going fishing or breaking bread with friends be a far more valuable way of identifying with Christ?

Right, part of the problem is that her solution requires all to have a rational and right judgment that the horrors were ‘worth it’ in the end. Hard to see how that’s rational if horrors aren’t required for en ever deepening relationship w God.

If it’s true that God is ”too big to be drawn down into our network of moral rights and obligations”, what principled reason is there to prevent this from applying with equal force against the idea that God is subject to rational norms?

YouTube video by Real Atheology Marilyn McCord Adams and the Defeat of Evil

"Marilyn McCord Adams and the Defeat of Evil" | Real Atheology | From @realatheology.bsky.social

#theology #philosophy

www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFRG...

She believes that God is perfectly good but that this goodness isn’t moral goodness. Nevertheless she thinks God must be good to persons. I clarify in the video which goes live in 5mins. Lolz

But for others who hold that God is a moral agent, this is potentially a valid inference. Great question.

In her application, such a claim wouldn’t follow. She holds that God is not a member of our moral community. So while God has no obligations to us, we do.

YouTube video by Real Atheology Marilyn McCord Adams and the Defeat of Evil

We’re premiering an episode today at 1pm est. Tune in to learn Madelyn McCord Adams’ answer to the problem of horrendous evils.

youtu.be/nFRGDG__ELM?...

Theodicy in a vale of tears was the title I believe.

Not philosophical but the Mcgrews and Licona each make historical cases but they despise each other’s methodology. So that’s fun.

“If you are willing to jettison enough basic moral intuitions, you can get the bar low enough that even a rather unlovely God can clear it.” -Evan Fales

“Traditional doctrines of hell go beyond failure to hatred and cruelty by imagining a God Who not only acquiesces in creaturely rebellion and dysfunction but either directly organizes or intentionally "outsources" a concentration camp of which Auschwitz is a pale imitation.”

Marilyn McCord Adams

What can be said of God’s love if it is consistent with God knowingly pushing his beloved well past their psychological breaking point while at the same time ensuring that his now psychologically disintegrated beloved lacks even the assurance of belief in him?

Not much.

David Hume on Miracles, Evidence, and Probability David Hume on Miracles, Evidence, and Probability [Vanderburgh, William L.] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. David Hume on Miracles, Evidence, and Probability

Looking for a gift for the philosophy lover in your life?

www.amazon.com/David-Hume-M...

#philsky #philsci #philosophy #miracles #philosophyofreligion #probability #evidence