U
uwushhdjwiio
New Member
- Jul 3, 2025
- 2
Im sorry to literate mfs i only made this with chatgpt, i dont have enough words in my vocabulary and im not very articulate, but i made this idea, chatgpt just helped me formulate it
The Formal Argument from Suffering in a Designed Moral System
Premises:
Conclusion:
Bonus Observation:
That collapses the entire moral framework of theism.
The Formal Argument from Suffering in a Designed Moral System
Premises:
- If God exists, He is traditionally defined as omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful), and omnibenevolent (all-good).
- An all-powerful God could create any possible world — including one without brutal suffering, without violating free will.
- An all-knowing God would foresee the exact consequences of every possible world He could create.
- An all-good God would prevent unnecessary or unjustified suffering, especially among innocents.
- God allegedly designed our minds — including our moral intuitions and emotional responses — to see suffering as evil, and pleasure as good.
- The actual world contains widespread, extreme, and unjustifiable suffering — both moral (caused by agents) and natural (caused by design).
- Therefore, God intentionally created a system where:
- He programmed us to feel suffering as evil,
- He populated the system with it anyway,
- And He expects us to trust Him based on a morality He himself designed — while violating it constantly.
Conclusion:
Therefore, the traditional concept of God is either:
- Logically incoherent (self-contradictory),
- Morally indefensible (cruel or manipulative),
- Or nonexistent.
Bonus Observation:
If believers claim "we can't understand God's plan", they cannot also claim "God is good."
Because "goodness" itself was designed into our brains — by the same God who now tells us not to trust it.
That collapses the entire moral framework of theism.