Argument from Desire

[reggieM]

Can the God still be “all-good”?

What would you require to answer the question “yes”?

 

[kk23wong]

I think I understand your point of view. It’s your belief that science alone, can provide the solution to the very real problem you’ve encountered. Or at least, that religion cannot help at all.
Almost all of the world’s undernourished live in developing countries. In Asia and the Pacific, an estimated 642 million people are suffering from chronic hunger; in Sub-Saharan Africa 265 million; in Latin America and the Caribbean 53 million; in the Near East and North Africa 42 million; and in developed countries 15 million in total.
The Catholic people throughout the world, especially in Western nations have continued to provide relief for people everywhere – including in places where the Church herself is persecuted or forbidden.

It’s our belief, however, that science and material aid alone are not sufficient to solve the crisis. We believe that the Catholic religion itself is an essential part of the solution.

The reason “why” is best discussed on another thread.

If you can connect your thoughts here back to the Argument from Desire, then that would be more on-topic.

Again, the hungry have desires.
You, yourself, have desire that all the hungry will be fed.
Why do you desire that?
Why do you not want to see other people suffering?
Are you concerned, for example, with people who are already dead who may be suffering?

Catholics are called by God to feed the hungry. Why? Are there consequences?

You are concerned about being “the joke of the universe”.

Will you ever know if you’re being laughed at? What difference does it make?

As I see it, your religious views are your motivation.
Therefore, religion is actually more important than your views on reality – since religion shapes what you consider to be reality.

Religions are important because it is a topic for unexplained phenomenon. It is an unexplored territory. Scientists named it as knowledge.

Without the real presence of the God, religions can no longer survive today. The continuity of religions is also a proof for the presence of this subject. My stance is clear. This subject who manipulates our world from the very beginning is not exactly the religions have claimed to be.

If I care about being a joke, I will not stand up to defend for what I truly believe in. The truth behind every religion can change the direction of our thinking and must be the very first step to delay the time. Life has a start. There must be an end. The key point in my hypothesis “Lives in Different Levels” is that human beings are only life cycles of this planet. Then (if you are smart enough) we immediate come to a conclusion that every planet is a single world and all lives end with it.

Desires may come from physical needs.
Desires of being admired and glorified also count.
What happen if the God has such desires?

Catholic was also born to be human. As a member of this fragile planet, their sympathy is also a driven force for them to feed the hungry.
What are the purposes of religions if we already have this common identity?

Teru Wong

 

[reggieM]

Without the real presence of the God, religions can no longer survive today.

I appreciate and admire your efforts. But I think it’s very difficult to engage in a philosophical discussion in a second language (I’m assuming that’s the case for you).

For example, the sentence above is confusing and not precise.

Are you claiming that “religions are no longer surviving today”?
Or, are you predicting that “religions today are no longer surviving”?

Religions are surviving and thriving, around the world.

Start there.

If your theories and opinions do not align with that fact, then nobody is going to take you seriously.