Why Doesn't God Stop Suffering? Stephen Woodford vs Sharon Dirckx Debate Hosted by Ruth Jackson

[@betsalprince]

"I need a framework that helps me make sense of my emotional response to suffering" You have empathy, Sharon. You emotionally respond to suffering because you're an empathic social being. Even dogs have that ability... You don't need to theologize, philosophize or come up with some metaphysical framework to help make sense of that.

[@drew2fast489]

What a horrible standard! Trust your own feelings? Really?? What about p*dophiles? Should they trust their feelings, too? Whose feelings are valid? Who decides?

[@gjeacocke]

Empathy has still to be objectively defined in itself. You have not defined. Good has to be defined. Bad has to be defined. God gives OBJECTIVE standard. Your position is merely subjective. Varying depending on the level of empathy a person has been taught.

[@drew2fast489]

@@betsalprince Whose empathy? The thief's or the philanthropist's?

[@betsalprince]

@@gjeacocke Why are you making the typical apologist moral argument when I'm talking about one's emotional response to suffering? You don't need some objective standard of good and bad in order to understand and share the feelings of another.

[@betsalprince]

​@@drew2fast489 I'm clearly talking about Sharon's empathy. You don't think she's devoid of empathy, do you?

[@BonesJonesUK]

Stephen offered some great arguments for his position. Sharon seemed to avoid questions she knew she couldn't answer honestly without it ruining her position, she instead would deflect to preaching.

[@onionbelly_]

The only time Sharon addresses the problem of suffering in this discussion is when she talks about the vital role of viruses in sustaining life on this planet, as if harmful viruses are necessary byproducts of God's perfect creation. I mean, what could possibly limit a deity with infinite powers from creating a world without the need for viruses, let alone harmful ones? Her theodicy flat-out undermines God's supposed omnipotence and omnibenevolence. Furthermore, Sharon acknowledges that sentient creatures have suffered long before human beings were around. This completely negates her "there's suffering because we live in a broken world" argument. She therefore spends most of the time trying to change the conversation to "what worldview best explains suffering" so she can simply preach. She does this all the time-not just with Stephen, but also in her conversations with other guests on this show (Alom Shaha and Hannah Timson).

[@j8000]

I've never considered the time-travelling aspect of the "broken world" argument, but you're right. Blaming suffering on the Fall can kinda work when you're around the campfire in the bronze age, where it made sense to thing humans had been around since day 1. But when we know humans are relative latecomers to the struggle for survival, it falls flat. You're then forced to adopt the monstrous position that non-human suffering is irrelevant.

[@onionbelly_]

@@j8000 Yep, some apologists (most notably WLC) have tried to resolve this problem by suggesting that non-human animals aren't really aware that they're in pain. Their theodicy is basically, "hey, it's not as bad as it looks".

[@wilhelmvonn9619]

The oldest religious belief of all is that the gods feed on human and animal suffering and death, which is why they send storms, droughts, and so on. If this is true then life makes a lot more sense.

[@andrelesf]

I don't think we'll be hearing much from Dr Sharon after the "limb".

[@gjeacocke]

Atheism EXPOSED! you say you want facts and testimonies YET you refuse to put ‘them on the stand’. A bit like seeing UFO’s.

[@goodquestion7915]

Dr. Dirckx powerfully defends God from the atheist's attacks with carefully developed empty and ineffective excuses.

[@2l84me8]

The suffering and indifference we witness on earth is exactly what you would expect from a universe with no god in it. There’s no way to excuse suffering with an all loving, perfect, and powerful god keeping tabs on humanity. Something isn’t adding up here.

[@drew2fast489]

Prove 1 thing you said.

[@ileanamuntean7338]

God is not Father Christmas, His purpose for our lives is not our purpose for our lives (mainly pleasure).

[@growtocycle6992]

Humans have free will... Since the fall, we have been naturally inclined towards greed, ambition, competition and other forms of sin

[@2l84me8]

@@growtocycle6992 How do you know we have free will? There was no “fall of man”. The Adam and Eve story is about 2 innocent humans who were tricked into playing a rigged game against an all knowing and powerful god. And then said god pretending to be shocked they did the very thing he intended them for in the first place.

[@weidchar1646]

This does not prove that there is no God. It only proves that there isn't an all-loving all just God.

[@fernando_magalhaes]

Stephen well done mate 👏 great answers. Sharon preaching was Embarrassing 😅

[@JeffreyRamsey]

Theres not one case of an apaatuee regrowing a limb.

[@stephenbailey9969]

In the Abrahamic religions, God created everything and sustains it moment by moment. Everything is by his will, either his permissive will that sets parameters and allows degrees of freedom within it or by his direct intervening will. The absolute good will one day be directly inaugurated for humanity and this planet. But in this age, much is permitted and delegated to the creativity of human minds, while God uses powers of persuasion to call people toward the good. What we call evil is not a separate power unto itself, but rather the misuse of that which is good. The natural world also, is permitted to undergo dynamic changes, many in response to human activity. All of this in the Abrahamic religions is due to the temporal and existential separation between this age and the age to come.

[@michaelrawson9293]

As a theist, this is an embarrassing performance by Sharon, who doesn't say anything of substance in this entire debate.

[@rhondapatterson1]

I am looking in the show notes for the first debate and can’t find the link. I like to watch things in order.

[@onionbelly_]

The link is there just above the "social links".

[@CaptainHowdyLa]

Is this not a re-upload? I've heard this debate before.

[@jtlawler100]

“If there is a loving God, how can He allow suffering in the world.” This is common challenge to believers. I though both your guests missed the key issue. The question begs a deeper question. Is it even possible there could be a world constituted in time and space where suffering would not exist. I believe in such a world there would be mass suicides. We are immersed in time and space. This requires that we see things in this world as differentiated. For example, being in a state of health is different than being in a state of disease. The former is desirable, the latter is undesirable. If I am in the latter I suffer, but only because I am aware of its opposite. Suppose further that the world was suddenly transformed so that there was no longer disease. No one would get sick; no one would age and suffer arthritis and dementia, no one would get a headache. No one would even wake up in the morning feeling sluggish. Everyone would feel perfectly fit, all the time, live 80 years and die in their sleep without pain. The same would be true for physical pain. If there were only unrelenting physical pain, if that was the only possible state, there would be no unhappiness about it because it just is. It is clear that in such a world, the very notion of dis-ease, would cease to have meaning, and healthfulness would become the unreflective norm, like water is to a fish swimming in it. So, imagine every conceivable cause of suffering was removed: natural disasters, interpersonal slights, disappointing setbacks in work and in love, any obstacle put in our path that might cause frustration. In such a world there would be nothing against which we would need to struggle. Why get out of bed in the morning? And please don’t respond that people would be free to pursue creativing. Pursuing creativity would also involve suffering, if there were any obstacles to achieving it. The pursuit is suffering. In Eden, Adam and Eve were expelled for eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. As a result, they were cast into a fallen world of differentiation. A is different than B. A is more desirable than B and I want to possess it. But I suffer in the attempt. The state of bliss in the Garden before the fall is unfathomable to us. In Paradise, there was no self-conscious person that could reflect about not having something that they wanted. “Who told you that you were naked.”

[@goodquestion7915]

What's the difference between an Apologist and a Woke? Apologists tick all the checkboxes.

[@gjeacocke]

Rebutting his response to the Q&A: if i showed you WIDOWS & ORPHANS in the bible and showed that in theory that God was compassionate, you have a choice to accept it. But you can not DENY that it suggests God IS compassionate. Is it pride that has problems of acknowledgement. If you treat god unfairly with what you know of him, does God have the right to send you to hell?

[@ritawing1064]

It's not god being compassionate, it's humans working out a bearable society. Provision for the poor appears in all ANE law codes.

[@gjeacocke]

@@ritawing1064 wrong. The jewish faith was god calling abram. Through this god revealed how ppl were to live. You talk rubbish. Why do atheists say rich ppl treat poor ppl with contempt? I study law. DEFINE poor and show me this actively working in that society?

[@ritawing1064]

@@gjeacocke I can see you are struggling with the language and will excuse your rudeness on that account. Your points have no relevance to my comment since its meaning seems to have escaped you, so there would be little benefit in addressing them.

[@gjeacocke]

@@ritawing1064 ah the atheist position to reject those who fail at educTion. The opposite of christian values. Compassion works on those that do NOT always deserve it.

[@gjeacocke]

@@ritawing1064 since when did grammar police become so orwellian in nature or are you a fool? Grammar is subjective by nature. Look at yoda? Shakespeare would fail today. Atheists like yourself are not kind and when you are all there is, your life is very bleak. You have a heart of stone. And sometimes that will never change. Hence why ppl can send themselves to hell.

[@HannahFaal]

Excellent session. The sovereignty of God was not acknowledged enough. His justice was not also acknowledged enough. For sin, justice is a must for a just God. He is the only one who could pay the price for justice and He did. He is love and that made Him pay that price. Our freedom to recognise His existence, love Him, recognise the price He paid is His free gift to us. The choice is ours to see and trust His love in all our circumstances including our suffering.

[@Metarig]

Evil exists in our world not because God is flawed, but because it enables the highest expression of love through sacrifice. Just as shadows make light visible, suffering allows us to demonstrate profound love by choosing to bear others' burdens. This echoes the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus, showing that our imperfect world is the necessary canvas for humanity's greatest purpose: to love sacrificially. Without evil and suffering, we would lack the opportunity to emulate divine love in its purest form.

[@seanpierce9386]

So does this mean that God shouldn’t send us to a better afterlife, but continue to repeat suffering on Earth? And what of suffering that isn’t useful?

[@Metarig]

@@seanpierce9386 I believe in Christian universalism, which sees the world as a place for us to learn and grow. Struggles and uncertainties are key to our development; they build our faith, trust, and help us choose God in all situations. This process shapes us for a better life in heaven. For those who struggle with this, God offers a chance to grow through a purification phase, known as hell, so everyone gets saved eventually. From this viewpoint, there's no "problem of evil" because everything God does is for the ultimate good, leading to a future where everyone is saved and evil no longer exists.

[@seanpierce9386]

@@Metarig Right, but I didn’t mention Hell. It’s Heaven that’s problematic here. And if there exists suffering with no purpose, your explanation doesn’t apply.

[@Metarig]

@@seanpierce9386 I mentioned hell to explain my beliefs, which are different from mainstream Christianity. Mainstream Christianity often struggles to address the problem of evil. How do you see suffering as pointless? I see it as a way to grow and learn, to develop a character fit for heaven. Even for those in hell, suffering isn't pointless-it serves the same purpose, helping them grow and move beyond it.

[@seanpierce9386]

@@Metarig Suffering is not pointless, but only some of the time. There exist situations in which suffering serves no purpose. Could God not accomplish His goals without it? If you believe in a better afterlife, this must be the case. So, why create Earth?

[@gjeacocke]

A C Grayling. A Grayling is a fish. Jesus said ‘i will make you fishers of men’. Tom Holland hooked A C with his response. And if he did not, false humility abides.

[@norwalltino]

Interesting. I've this comment: Thoughts out of the blue on a Sunday evening: God is love, but he needs your money! God sits up in heaven, or perhaps in the bowels of the earth, or on another planet or galaxy? He is omnipotent, he can control everything, but he or she.....does not do so, for some deeper reason. Is there a deeper or higher purpose? He created us, we are told, and he gave us free will, we are told. If bad things happen on earth, it's our own fault. God is not responsible, even though he made us. Even in his own image, that must mean that we look like him. Then we look at all the suffering, not necessarily man-made, but suffering in nature every day. When eight lions pounce on the antelope and eat it alive, a brutal event with colossal suffering. There is no sin or devil in the picture, just the brutal devouring of a living individual. Then we ask, does this have a higher meaning? Isn't it natural that the lions are hungry? When a child dies on its mother's lap of malaria, does that have a higher meaning? Whether you believe in a God or not, the reality is the same. Everything is brutal and incomprehensible. But believing in a god connects us to the hope of something better in the future. But is it wishful thinking? When bad things happen, isn't a breakdown an obstacle on the road ahead? All our empirical data points to breakthroughs, good or bad; we hit the wall every day, but we defy it and keep going. So, to the point. From a naturalistic perspective, this is natural, the path of water from the lake to the sea via the river. From a theistic perspective, it's a god in a cloud watching and passing judgement at some point in the future. Allegedly a fair judgement. There are three possibilities here. Either this God has relinquished all control and lets the bumblebee fly, or he sits in the cloud with steely control, remembers everything, knows everything, allows everything, but he doesn't interfere, just watching, and will eventually judge the creature he himself created. Or everything is natural without that god at all. Who knows, heaven knows or you know from your heart. The Book of Job is relevant here. (Blasfemic)

[@Jeroen4]

The fact you probably thought this sounded profound is pretty hilarious 😆

[@dinogregoriou1671]

Nothing is real and not everything that happens is seen by all.Each individual is shown what they need to see for a reason. God shows us what we need to see in order to provoke our thoughts into a state where acceptance of His will is what reenforces our belief in Him and preparing your soul for the next step . You mustn't look at this world as good or bad nor judge Gods actions as good or evil. Look at all that exists as a library of creation where everything coexisting and take in all the knowledge, without prejudice, in order to balance the scale of life's meaning. Remember that our soul needs to know both sides of life in order to understand and move to a creative existence. Judging creation means that you do not accept Gods will and blocks the way for your soul to move forward. Believe that everything that happens to you is meant to be and if you don't accept this all you are doing is building an unstable wall that will eventually collapse . Be strong and you will see the light in the end .

[@fernando_magalhaes]

If you are free "free will" why do you pray for a cure? Didn't god gave you free will? Praying would interfere with free will wouldn't it?

[@josejavierlopezacosta4741]

"So does that mean the perpetrator of the crime and the victim could both be in heaven together?" 1:02:48- Absolutely, who do you think killed Jesus? The Jews? The Romans? Of course not, it was US..... Our sins.

[@weidchar1646]

Remind us again who supposedly gave us the inclination towards sin? Answer: Yahweh

[@josejavierlopezacosta4741]

@@weidchar1646 Good question! Some Christians think it was Yahweh whereas others think God created everything perfect. So, in my opinion, if Yahweh is responsible for our inclination towards sin, "He" couldn't be a loving God. That's why I believe in the second option.

[@j8000]

​@@josejavierlopezacosta4741if everything was created perfect, it would remain perfect, because a perfect thing would have the property of perfect resistance to corruption.

[@josejavierlopezacosta4741]

@@j8000 Interesting point! However, I believe free will changes everything.

[@j8000]

@@josejavierlopezacosta4741 no such thing.

[@mohamedali2858]

A primitive and simple concept, untainted by the academic complexities. Can there be joy of success without hardship?

[@onionbelly_]

What if a child dies due to hardship? Where's the joy in that?

[@mohamedali2858]

@@onionbelly_ If you believe in God and the Day of Judgment and believe in Heaven and Hell and that there is accountability according to the conditions, regulations and laws that were set by the Creator of this universe and that every believing, rational person who can distinguish between good and evil adheres to, and based on that, the great victory is achieved, then a question for you is: What is the fate of children who have not reached the age of accountability and distinguishing between good and evil? These children enter heaven without prior accountability.

[@onionbelly_]

​@@mohamedali2858 Why are you talking about the afterlife when the problem of suffering pertains to suffering in this world? Would you ever allow a child to suffer and die of starvation in front of your eyes because you believe that children automatically go to Heaven?

[@mohamedali2858]

@@onionbelly_ Because you said he had his share of suffering and died. How many children are killed by abortion each year compared to those who die from artificial famine? Is this suffering the choice of criminals or the choice of children?

[@onionbelly_]

​@@mohamedali2858 Yeah, and I explained to you that the problem of suffering pertains to suffering in this world, not the afterlife, so you're making an irrelevant argument. And now you want to bring up abortion? You tell me. How many children die of natural causes every year? Not all cases of child hunger or infant mortality in general is the result of human wrongdoing, so the question still stands: why would an omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent deity allow ANY child to suffer of starvation? Did children choose to starve?

[@kentonnur]

Unfortunately Sharon, in trying give reasons for suffering, or indeed, to say sometimes we can’t understand, doesn’t answer the ultimate question. True reformed Calvinists like Piper and Mcarthur will unapologetically state that all that happens in the world, supposed good or bad, is ordained by God, and is to his glory. Unpalatable as that seems to most , at least it gives a constant reason

[@gjeacocke]

The atheists who are proud and lack humility and say they WILL WORSHIP god if he heals. I want to see this ‘young guy’ showing compassion to EVERY NURSE, DR, SURGEON who heals OTHERS. Give them a hug, give them money, give them food. Support these HEALERS. Are atheists just FULL OF IT when they demand God to heal?

[@garycpriestley]

Once has reliable, predictable evidence of success... the other a myth generated to keep people ignorant.... your choice

[@TerrenceHosang]

atheists don't claim to be able to heal people, Christians claim that their god can and wants to.... but it seems like the loving god prefers not to... wonder why?

[@gjeacocke]

@@garycpriestley wow, ignorance. In law you have witness testimonies. Lawyers who never witnessed the crime they are putting together as close to the truth as they can. Now the original audience, these people had observed things. This is WHY they followed jesus in certain situation. the romans did not crucify a myth. The jews did not take out a CURSE on christians because of a myth. J r r tolkien STUDIED myths. You do NOT. The original meaning of myth is different to what modern thinkers have defined it as. Read the fascinating meeting where C S Lewis talks to Tolkien about myths. Lewis at this point WAS AN ATHEIST (professor of english).

[@gjeacocke]

@@TerrenceHosang atheists use healing to say ‘i will worship god if i OBSERVE healing’. Your lack of compassion towards your NEIGHBOURS who heal you will show how you are found to be a liar. Would you heal ‘George Best’ who refused to stop drinking and give him a transplant?

[@gjeacocke]

@@TerrenceHosang there are two issues when jesus had to heal. Jesus had to look at the heart. If you read the text closely jesus said ‘ your sins are forgiven’ when he had healed. Why?

[@AnonymousWon-uu5yn]

Why its evil to have kids. Its evil to force someone into the type of existence that they might hate to exist in and its extremely abusive to force someone into the type of existence where they will suffer against their will or possibly suffer horribly against their will. And if they never come into existence then thats just fine because they will never know or care that they never existed.

[@harlowcj]

I've always said that there is absolutely no logical or moral reason one can provide to convince a secular person to reproduce. Idk where you get your idea of evil if you're an atheist but at least you're not afraid to say the quiet part out loud. Atheists love to try to argue with me on this obvious point because they think that the Christian must be always wrong.

[@jamielehn6926]

I don’t understand this guys position, it’s a very unique take on Christianity that he has, and I don’t know anyone that shares his view.

[@downenout8705]

You definitely need to get out more. I agree with the vast majority of his views on this subject. It's very simple, for example many thousands of people have suffered terribly over the centuries because the biblical god chose to inspire Leviticus 20: 13. These people were doing nothing more than being true to who they were and to incite people to cause them suffering is inconsistent with a supposedly all loving god.

[@gjeacocke]

The last 30 second point at the end: no GOOD atheist would RELEASE Barabbas instead of Jesus at the TRIAL of Jesus. Be a method actor. Imagine you are a jew 2000 years ago. Learn the culture, learn the Mosaic law. Answer this : dis jesus misinterpret the Mosaic law. This is your question answered about punishing.

[@edenlifeonearth]

I actually thought Sharon did a very good job of explaining some very nucanced issues within a short time, which is indicative of a deeply reflective thinker and scholar. To a casual listener, she came across as ‘dodging ‘ the question or unclear compared with Stephen, who looks at life as either black or white. The fact of the matter is : she’s right : life (reality) is not black or white (like science or maths who have definite answers), but much more colourful with emotions and contradictions happening side by side logic and reason ( like literature and philosophy- there are more than one possible interpretation or answer). What we want to believe in is something that approximates reality the best. Christianity, and only Christianity reflects reality more accurately. This is because we don’t live life in a black and white way (atheism); we contradict ourselves quite a bit, and we live by feelings and emotions, along side reasoning. To say if God is good, He must do what we humans say is good (eg. No punishing wrong doers or must eradicate every sickness or suffering NOW). Well our parents don’t give us everything we think is good, sometimes not at the time we say is good, precisely because they KNOW what’s best for us. It’s not black and white. It’s complex, but we know their judgement is done in LOVE for the child. LOVE is not logical. Why would God allow a repentant murderer into heaven but not an unrepentant seemingly ‘good’ person? Well firstly no one is perfectly good all the time, the ‘good’ person is only ‘better’ than most but he/she is not 100% guiltless throughout his/her life. Second, Sharon is right : LOVE & JUSTICE are two sides of a coin. If God was good, He’d need to be just, and He’s not unjust to allow someone (who’s done even one wrong thing in life) to go to somewhere where is 100% pure and holy, to enjoy God’s presence, nor would this person want to be with God forever anyway because he/she didn’t believe in Him, like Stephen here. It’d be hell for Stephen to be in heaven with the God he doesn’t love or care to know! So yes God is love but He’s just as well. But all is reconciled in Himself (Jesus dying), so He did provide a solution to the ‘problem of evil and suffering’, just that atheists don’t like this solution! And they’re judging God with their imperfect little puny brains, shaking their fists at Him, saying ‘It’s not fair! This solution is crazy, You’re still bad! ‘ it’s just like an ant talking to a human! It’s incredible all these points made by Sharon are missed by most people. On point of how our world is getting fairer as we find out about female or LGBT rights, it’s actually extraordinary how we have more messed up societies, with children mutilations, confusion, depression, suicides, illegitimate children, dysfunctional families and crime rates all going up and up, and no sign of stopping. No wonder, because the belief in God is now out of the window! Truly sad.

[@AhmadSammy]

God is too mysterious to understand, but look at these clear miracles that could only be God’s intervention. Clearly we can tell for sure in the cases that support God’s goodness and intervention, but all the cases that undermine that are because we cannot begin to fathom how God works.

[@truncated7644]

Listen to yourself. You use words like "clearly" and "for sure" yet say God is mysterious. What exactly is clear or for sure about your opinion?

[@seanpierce9386]

Your point is so fallacious I can’t tell whether you’re being ironic. You’re just selectively accepting or rejecting events based on whether they align with your own premeditated conclusion.

[@AhmadSammy]

Wow..I must be so bad at sarcasm 😅 Maybe I should have put the word “Sarcasm: “ in front of the comment 😅

[@truncated7644]

@@AhmadSammy That's hilarious! You sounded just like all of his other commenters!

[@ptwlk]

God intended this world to be perfect, but men sinned and the consequence is separation from holiness and eventual death. This world is sick but God has promised to save us and to give us a perfect new world, basked in His glory.

[@AhmadSammy]

I thought if God intends something it has to happen because he’s all powerful and all knowing. Surely man cannot just override what God intended.

[@thesecretplace1055]

​@AhmadSammy if there is no free will for the creatures then yes, it can go as God "intended" as you are postulating, which I really believe you don't actually have thought this through enough, but when free will comes into play how can it be free if you dictate everything? Even after saying this, God's will, will come into fruition in the end you just have to study what prophecy is. Blessings!

[@AhmadSammy]

@@thesecretplace1055 I didn’t bring in the word “intended”, it was in the comment I responded to. It’s fine to say that God doesn’t interfere in making the world better because he wants to preserve free will (although that leaves out all the horrible things that happen without any input from humans, like animals eating each other or natural disasters that happened before man even discovered fire). But then saying that God knows what humans will do, and he created them with all their base desires, but also he intended the world to be perfect and man derailed that? That just doesn’t make sense to me. If you want to talk about some prophecy go ahead, but then again, that does not account man derailed God’s intention, unless the intention was always to have the world broken then fix it later.

[@CMA418]

Well to be fair, men have claimed that God has promised to save us. We must place our faith in those men and what they said was true and not ill-motivated. Then we must place faith in ourselves and those around us that we are interpreting correctly. That’s a lot of faith to place in humans.

[@onionbelly_]

If Adam and Eve resisted the deception and temptation in the garden, wouldn't their offspring, descendants or any other human being eventually "turn away from God" and introduce sin into the world with their supposed free will? The Fall seems to be an inevitable outcome in this respect, and if God had foreknowledge of this inevitability due to his omniscience, then I don't see how anyone can reasonably argue that God created a perfect world. What I see is an illusion of perfection in these Genesis accounts, just as a faulty product may initially seem flawless.

[@jarvis8986]

Stephen misses many points. Free will is a gift and like a child you can't wait to get older and do what they want so that their parents can't control them. God isn't a magic genie and through free will men do evil. This life is a test for us and instead of pointing your finger at God we are supposed to point the finger at our selves to prevent and stop evil. Stephen claimed we can't answer a hard question yet its easy. God so loved the world and why he tries to give a way for every person. The murder can still have a way for sure if he repented and believes but every person will still be judged by God. If God is loving then he gave everyone a way and you still have to face your judgment after. Stephen wants it not to be true for his own reasons obviously but that's the test. Will a person be honest to look for God? Will they acknowledge if God reveals him self? Will you dismisses if God does something in your life. If Stephen was honest with himself then God would do something in his life. But that's what a loving God does. Love won't force, love won't push.

[@mceajc]

"...and through free will men do evil." This is true. I take issue, however, when many christians don't accept the other option: "Through free will humans do good." They so often ascribe any good actions a person can do as a result of god's will, and anything bad as human will. Never mind that this is a claim that cannot be evidenced, it makes humans a mere puppet that is immediately threatened with eternal damnation if they express their own free will. This view is abhorrent to me. I am free to do good or evil, and I choose to do good where I can. I CHOOSE it. Me - and so many other people - choose to do good.

[@growtocycle6992]

​@@mceajchumans can choose to do good... But they can't choose to be perfect

[@markwiggins6442]

Can he go one sentence without presenting a straw man argument??? A child can disassemble his arguments. What a waste of time.

[@AhmadSammy]

- God is empathetic because he came down and got crucified, while a sympathetic god would only shout down instructions from the top of the pit. * But all I got were the instructions - He already got crucified man, what more do you want..? Jeez..

[@SkilledTadpole]

Yeah no, shouting down from the top of the pit even once would be vastly more believable than a resurrection story from 2000 years ago and would get everyone on the same page more than any other action ever could.

[@betsalprince]

This god sacrificed himself onto himself for a weekend to serve as a loophole for the rules that he created so that he won't send some people to his eternal torture chamber. This is psychopathy, not empathy.

[@cmdzee63]

Why even engage Stephen? He's made his career mocking and scoffing at religion. Like Hitchens before him, he's only to be pitied, certainly not revered as some intellectual powerhouse capable of making cogent, good faith arguments

[@CMA418]

Which of his arguments would you say is not cogent?

[@differentdestiny]

Where in this interaction was he mocking and scoffing? Yes, he does do exactly that on his channel, but I've not seen him showing disrespect where the interlocutor wasn't being rude first. You seem to hold as much contempt for his lack of faith as he does in his spicer videos. To the point of saying "why even bother listening to him, he's just a stupid atheist who will never understand my specific religion" group him into having the same views and arguments as some other famous atheist dude and just look down on him. He has no problem with theists largely. He, as many of us, have huge issues with people who have a personal faith imposing those beliefs in everyone else who feels differently, and who treat their fellow man with hate or contempt.