are angels really just... miserable?
For Harpalycus.
1. I do not consider egomania to be perfection. But the idea of something creater another lesser thing is partly egomania: the sense of I am better than the other.
2. Perfection and imperfection are a linguistic impossibility obviously. Anything else requires on substituting words as I decide to do. Thereby flaws (imperfection) can lead to something seeming 'just right' (perfection). Anything further is pointless.
3. Purpose is not always necessary, or rather it is not always clear. I proposed depression meaning lack of purpose, for that instance.
4. God in my phrasing does not find pleasure but purpose in 'torturing' humanity, but the torture is a by-product and not directly his design.
5. It is not obvious? Well just consider how all human beings have the capability of making children: that does not mean we are sperm and eggs.
I said human beings were higher beings simply because it came to mind. Personally human beings are still animals, just slightly better at bipedal movement and such other jazz.
6. + 7. + 8. + All when it comes to it. These are merely my ideas, definitely not gospel and not particularly well based on religious evidence.
I find it rather tiring when people question every modern day implication of the Religion facet, and conveniently forget its foundings and developments. So that they have the audacity to question something in a bid to prove it wrong in parts or whole, while missing the more important picture of what religion represents. It seems weird to raise questions about God in the now, and never ask a thing about God in the past, the early days. To also question God, cast him down, call him imperfect, his faithful incapable of answering every question and thereby be guilty of being human, and altogether throw a tantrum when God does not appear, well that seems rather mad. (And yes, Harp this is both a direct and indirect message to you, good luck firguring out which one it is as it is both and not even I bloodly well know.)
Methinks the thread has gone a bit askew again.
Anyway, Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas. And to cover everything else: Have some Cheer! (Of no specific faith, creed, or belief nomination.)
1. I do not consider egomania to be perfection. But the idea of something creater another lesser thing is partly egomania: the sense of I am better than the other.
2. Perfection and imperfection are a linguistic impossibility obviously. Anything else requires on substituting words as I decide to do. Thereby flaws (imperfection) can lead to something seeming 'just right' (perfection). Anything further is pointless.
3. Purpose is not always necessary, or rather it is not always clear. I proposed depression meaning lack of purpose, for that instance.
4. God in my phrasing does not find pleasure but purpose in 'torturing' humanity, but the torture is a by-product and not directly his design.
5. It is not obvious? Well just consider how all human beings have the capability of making children: that does not mean we are sperm and eggs.
I said human beings were higher beings simply because it came to mind. Personally human beings are still animals, just slightly better at bipedal movement and such other jazz.
6. + 7. + 8. + All when it comes to it. These are merely my ideas, definitely not gospel and not particularly well based on religious evidence.
I find it rather tiring when people question every modern day implication of the Religion facet, and conveniently forget its foundings and developments. So that they have the audacity to question something in a bid to prove it wrong in parts or whole, while missing the more important picture of what religion represents. It seems weird to raise questions about God in the now, and never ask a thing about God in the past, the early days. To also question God, cast him down, call him imperfect, his faithful incapable of answering every question and thereby be guilty of being human, and altogether throw a tantrum when God does not appear, well that seems rather mad. (And yes, Harp this is both a direct and indirect message to you, good luck firguring out which one it is as it is both and not even I bloodly well know.)
Methinks the thread has gone a bit askew again.
Anyway, Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas. And to cover everything else: Have some Cheer! (Of no specific faith, creed, or belief nomination.)
Ok, here we go and I'll be as concise as possible since I'm at work right now:
1. Perfect world: all goes back to choice/free will. Things were perfect at the get go, Satan allowed pride to twist his thinking, thus he fell away from God, became the ruler of all those angels that joined him. They all had the ability to choose as well.
2. God changing his mind: Why not? If he created something perfect, and those who came along by choice to allow imperfection/sin to enter in, and shat all over it, don't you think that God would have a back-up plan, aka Jesus?
3. Blood sacrifice was required in the old Testament/ways--it's all over the place in the early Books of the Bible as people bringing doves, sheep, etc. to the temple for sacrifice. Look at what Abraham did when he was instructed to sacrifice his son, Issac--God tested him, saw that he was really going to do it out of obedience, but then made a ram appear which was to be sacrificed instead of Issac (which by the way, is symbolic of Jesus--he like the ram, was sacrificed in our place) So, yes--blood sacrifice was all over the place in the Old Testament, and once Jesus came along, it was no longer required. --Back up plan, God changing his mind, etc.
4. Death: Was never an issue until perfection was tainted--look how long some of the Old Testament people lived: 400, 500, 900 years, etc., but still all after the initial event that caused perfection to be not so perfect anymore.
5. Why are you hurt? If we are all descended of Adam and Eve, according to Genesis, then we are all descended of their hurt, sin, misdoings as well. Trickle down effect, sins of the fathers visited upon down the generations, etc.
6. Suffering allowed: how many times have we as parents had to tell our children: "Don't do that..." until they finally won't listen, and need to fall on their faces once in a while to learn a lesson. Sometimes you have to let them fail so they can learn how to succeed.
7. God's designs: again, originally created to not be as we see them in our world, but being in our world and subject to its rules-post-fall of perfection, they live accordingly. Book of Isaiah, where the lion will lay down with the lamb--back to perfection/Heaven.
8. Job: yes, lots got wasted, but Job was blessed even more immensely than he was before he lost everything, after all was said and done. And we all lose our children in some way, eventually--they are only on loan from God for a time, and if God gave Job everything he had in the first place, originating it from "perfection" (Heaven), then wouldn't it stand to reason, that by allowing it to be taken away, only returns it to it's origin?
9. How do I know God? Each of us has our own personal walk with Him if we "choose" to allow it in our lives. He speaks through many conduits--poems, dreams, music, signs you see along the road, sometimes an audible voice--look at Baalam's donkey in the Bible who spoke out loud as a human does. I see God in all things and it's all based on perspective: I choose to believe, I choose to see that God just gave me a huge-ass sewing job that will pay me $1000 when I'm done, which is money that will cover the cost of all my daughter's books she needs for college for the next 3 years, I choose to see that when I give something away, I get something back; i.e.--closet cleaning, giving it to those in need and receiving their thanks...it's all the little stuff of everyday life, not some big huge trumpet-huzzah that ushers in the blessings. Perspective...glass half full or half empty.
10. Why cancer? God didn't create it, but he created the ability for it to happen by things we do and choices we make. Example: mine probably came from a number of sources, one being getting hit on the chest for years from a laser beam on one of the machines I worked on in the lab, years ago, as well as taking a hit from my own daughter's radiation when she was a baby, being treated for cancer of her own in her eye. Bottom line: yup it sucks, but it came about by me helping others, doing their blood tests, holding my baby so she wouldn't pick at her eye during treatment, and having survived it, I can further use it to help others in the same boat, by offering support in however I can.
11. Knowing the result beforehand: Yes, God does, and given that, isn't it better to say "hey, look what I accomplished by sticking out the trials of life" than to just have a magic wand waved to get us to our destinies? =sense of accomplishment.
12. I don't profess to know everything, but I've learned a lot, it works better for me to believe than to not, and I'm sure there will be much more to come, both in this life and afterward--how can I possibly know all the repercussions of all my actions until I stand before God someday and hopefully he says "well done, good and faithful servant" and shows me that maybe I did make a difference, and all that I did, trickled down to cause some good in other people's lives that I never knew about until I get my performance evaluation by the Almighty.
13. Merry Christmas to all who observe/celebrate it.
1. Perfect world: all goes back to choice/free will. Things were perfect at the get go, Satan allowed pride to twist his thinking, thus he fell away from God, became the ruler of all those angels that joined him. They all had the ability to choose as well.
2. God changing his mind: Why not? If he created something perfect, and those who came along by choice to allow imperfection/sin to enter in, and shat all over it, don't you think that God would have a back-up plan, aka Jesus?
3. Blood sacrifice was required in the old Testament/ways--it's all over the place in the early Books of the Bible as people bringing doves, sheep, etc. to the temple for sacrifice. Look at what Abraham did when he was instructed to sacrifice his son, Issac--God tested him, saw that he was really going to do it out of obedience, but then made a ram appear which was to be sacrificed instead of Issac (which by the way, is symbolic of Jesus--he like the ram, was sacrificed in our place) So, yes--blood sacrifice was all over the place in the Old Testament, and once Jesus came along, it was no longer required. --Back up plan, God changing his mind, etc.
4. Death: Was never an issue until perfection was tainted--look how long some of the Old Testament people lived: 400, 500, 900 years, etc., but still all after the initial event that caused perfection to be not so perfect anymore.
5. Why are you hurt? If we are all descended of Adam and Eve, according to Genesis, then we are all descended of their hurt, sin, misdoings as well. Trickle down effect, sins of the fathers visited upon down the generations, etc.
6. Suffering allowed: how many times have we as parents had to tell our children: "Don't do that..." until they finally won't listen, and need to fall on their faces once in a while to learn a lesson. Sometimes you have to let them fail so they can learn how to succeed.
7. God's designs: again, originally created to not be as we see them in our world, but being in our world and subject to its rules-post-fall of perfection, they live accordingly. Book of Isaiah, where the lion will lay down with the lamb--back to perfection/Heaven.
8. Job: yes, lots got wasted, but Job was blessed even more immensely than he was before he lost everything, after all was said and done. And we all lose our children in some way, eventually--they are only on loan from God for a time, and if God gave Job everything he had in the first place, originating it from "perfection" (Heaven), then wouldn't it stand to reason, that by allowing it to be taken away, only returns it to it's origin?
9. How do I know God? Each of us has our own personal walk with Him if we "choose" to allow it in our lives. He speaks through many conduits--poems, dreams, music, signs you see along the road, sometimes an audible voice--look at Baalam's donkey in the Bible who spoke out loud as a human does. I see God in all things and it's all based on perspective: I choose to believe, I choose to see that God just gave me a huge-ass sewing job that will pay me $1000 when I'm done, which is money that will cover the cost of all my daughter's books she needs for college for the next 3 years, I choose to see that when I give something away, I get something back; i.e.--closet cleaning, giving it to those in need and receiving their thanks...it's all the little stuff of everyday life, not some big huge trumpet-huzzah that ushers in the blessings. Perspective...glass half full or half empty.
10. Why cancer? God didn't create it, but he created the ability for it to happen by things we do and choices we make. Example: mine probably came from a number of sources, one being getting hit on the chest for years from a laser beam on one of the machines I worked on in the lab, years ago, as well as taking a hit from my own daughter's radiation when she was a baby, being treated for cancer of her own in her eye. Bottom line: yup it sucks, but it came about by me helping others, doing their blood tests, holding my baby so she wouldn't pick at her eye during treatment, and having survived it, I can further use it to help others in the same boat, by offering support in however I can.
11. Knowing the result beforehand: Yes, God does, and given that, isn't it better to say "hey, look what I accomplished by sticking out the trials of life" than to just have a magic wand waved to get us to our destinies? =sense of accomplishment.
12. I don't profess to know everything, but I've learned a lot, it works better for me to believe than to not, and I'm sure there will be much more to come, both in this life and afterward--how can I possibly know all the repercussions of all my actions until I stand before God someday and hopefully he says "well done, good and faithful servant" and shows me that maybe I did make a difference, and all that I did, trickled down to cause some good in other people's lives that I never knew about until I get my performance evaluation by the Almighty.
13. Merry Christmas to all who observe/celebrate it.
To MadameLavender.
1. You simply reiterate your premise, but do not even attempt to answer the points against it. What is free will? Does it exist? Why is it a good thing? Why is it worth suffering? Can heaven exist without it or not? Whence came Satan’s pride (if he was a perfect creature in a perfect creation how could he become proud – you are agreeing with the watchmaker blaming his ‘perfect’ watch’s failure on a faulty spring). How can perfection contain imperfection? These questions demand some sort of answer. Some sort of analysis.
2. Why cannot God change his mind? You have obviously not thought about the true nature of perfection and omnibenevolence. You are thinking of God in crude anthropomorphic terms. If God is good, he is perfectly good and cannot create something less than perfectly good. So there can be no need for a change. As Leibniz observed, all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds. You have not considered omniscience. How can God need a back up plan when he knows what is to happen? He ‘knew’ the earth would fall. The Fall is not good. Hence God is not good. Or does not exist.
3. Again you are not meeting the objection. To say there was blood sacrifice is not answering why. WHY did God demand animals to have their throats cut and to bleed to death in his honour? As Kant said ‘We can judge the heart of a man, by his treatment of animals.’
4. What has longevity to do with inevitable death. If someone made a mistake why did a loving God not forgive them? Why did he introduce death?
5. Why are we hurt? You are seriously defending the morality of visiting the sins of the parents upon the children? Your Father is a thief so we are going to beat you up? Do you really consider what you are saying?
6. Failure with children. We are not omniscient and omnipotent gods. God could ensure that his creation does not fall on its face. And with free will intact (if it exists at all).
7. Why did Eve’s error lead to the fawn trapped in a forest fire and burned alive? If God did not make them, whence came y pestis and the great white shark? How did Krakatoa and Thera erupt without God’s design? You keep repeating that it is all to do with ‘our’ fall. So Eve ate a forbidden fruit. And a loving God creates all this savagery, terror and pain and blames us?
8. I am incredulous. God wipes out all of Job’s children and servants but ultimately ‘blesses’ Job with more. And that justifies the death of the original people? What sort of morality is this?
9. You choose to believe, which is fine, but I would expect some thought about what you believe. To consider the objections in the full. As Hobbes observed (I paraphrase), to say that God spoke to a man in a dream is to say no more than he dreamt that God spoke to him.
10. If God didn’t create cancer then who did? He is the creator. You cannot avoid it by sleight of words. Helping others is great. But why do we need to? Will you not be happy in heaven, will you be unfulfilled, because there is no old person dying lonely, frightened and in pain for you to help? And if you had a magic wand would you not wave it, or would you lecture them on how much better it is for them to suffer?
11. I will give a categorical no to your rhetorical question. No, it is not better to survive (for a time) all the pain and suffering that life dumps on us than to have a happy, contented and fulfilled existence for all and for ever. In fact, the very concept of Heaven shows this to be the case. Consider the many who crumble beneath the blows of life. And if a sense of accomplishment is so important in any fundamental sense then why cannot God give us that, without the concomitant hurt?
12. Not to know answers is normal. We all live in a fog of ignorance. I cannot make you face up to the actual questions, to even acknowledge that they exist. But they do. And, if there are answers, then, with all due respect, you have failed to give them.
To Viddax.
1. If egomania is not perfection then what relevance does it have to a question concerning a perfect God?
2. Something that ‘seems’ ‘just right’ is not perfection. When discussing absolute claims of perfection then we must use the term correctly.
4. How can God allow something as a ‘by-product’ of his design? He is omnipotent. He can eradicate the ‘by-product if he chooses. He is not constrained by laws. The ‘by-product’ must be part of the creation by design.
5. I have no idea of the relevance of this observation. Please explicate.
Conclusion. What makes you think that the founding and development of religion has been conveniently forgotten? Simply because it has not come up? What is there about this that you think makes any difference to the questions?
So what does religion represent to you?
Why should questions about earlier concepts of divinity and ancient accounts of Gods be relevant to questions about the rational integrity of present beliefs? If they do have relevance, then please specify what. If it is so important, why have you not done so?
Why should important belief systems not be questioned? And what tantrums? To give reasoned arguments against a belief system is scarcely a tantrum.
And I do not expect anyone to know all the answers but, if they answer none, then it is reasonable to assume that the answers do not exist, until someone appears who can provide such answers.
1. You simply reiterate your premise, but do not even attempt to answer the points against it. What is free will? Does it exist? Why is it a good thing? Why is it worth suffering? Can heaven exist without it or not? Whence came Satan’s pride (if he was a perfect creature in a perfect creation how could he become proud – you are agreeing with the watchmaker blaming his ‘perfect’ watch’s failure on a faulty spring). How can perfection contain imperfection? These questions demand some sort of answer. Some sort of analysis.
2. Why cannot God change his mind? You have obviously not thought about the true nature of perfection and omnibenevolence. You are thinking of God in crude anthropomorphic terms. If God is good, he is perfectly good and cannot create something less than perfectly good. So there can be no need for a change. As Leibniz observed, all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds. You have not considered omniscience. How can God need a back up plan when he knows what is to happen? He ‘knew’ the earth would fall. The Fall is not good. Hence God is not good. Or does not exist.
3. Again you are not meeting the objection. To say there was blood sacrifice is not answering why. WHY did God demand animals to have their throats cut and to bleed to death in his honour? As Kant said ‘We can judge the heart of a man, by his treatment of animals.’
4. What has longevity to do with inevitable death. If someone made a mistake why did a loving God not forgive them? Why did he introduce death?
5. Why are we hurt? You are seriously defending the morality of visiting the sins of the parents upon the children? Your Father is a thief so we are going to beat you up? Do you really consider what you are saying?
6. Failure with children. We are not omniscient and omnipotent gods. God could ensure that his creation does not fall on its face. And with free will intact (if it exists at all).
7. Why did Eve’s error lead to the fawn trapped in a forest fire and burned alive? If God did not make them, whence came y pestis and the great white shark? How did Krakatoa and Thera erupt without God’s design? You keep repeating that it is all to do with ‘our’ fall. So Eve ate a forbidden fruit. And a loving God creates all this savagery, terror and pain and blames us?
8. I am incredulous. God wipes out all of Job’s children and servants but ultimately ‘blesses’ Job with more. And that justifies the death of the original people? What sort of morality is this?
9. You choose to believe, which is fine, but I would expect some thought about what you believe. To consider the objections in the full. As Hobbes observed (I paraphrase), to say that God spoke to a man in a dream is to say no more than he dreamt that God spoke to him.
10. If God didn’t create cancer then who did? He is the creator. You cannot avoid it by sleight of words. Helping others is great. But why do we need to? Will you not be happy in heaven, will you be unfulfilled, because there is no old person dying lonely, frightened and in pain for you to help? And if you had a magic wand would you not wave it, or would you lecture them on how much better it is for them to suffer?
11. I will give a categorical no to your rhetorical question. No, it is not better to survive (for a time) all the pain and suffering that life dumps on us than to have a happy, contented and fulfilled existence for all and for ever. In fact, the very concept of Heaven shows this to be the case. Consider the many who crumble beneath the blows of life. And if a sense of accomplishment is so important in any fundamental sense then why cannot God give us that, without the concomitant hurt?
12. Not to know answers is normal. We all live in a fog of ignorance. I cannot make you face up to the actual questions, to even acknowledge that they exist. But they do. And, if there are answers, then, with all due respect, you have failed to give them.
To Viddax.
1. If egomania is not perfection then what relevance does it have to a question concerning a perfect God?
2. Something that ‘seems’ ‘just right’ is not perfection. When discussing absolute claims of perfection then we must use the term correctly.
4. How can God allow something as a ‘by-product’ of his design? He is omnipotent. He can eradicate the ‘by-product if he chooses. He is not constrained by laws. The ‘by-product’ must be part of the creation by design.
5. I have no idea of the relevance of this observation. Please explicate.
Conclusion. What makes you think that the founding and development of religion has been conveniently forgotten? Simply because it has not come up? What is there about this that you think makes any difference to the questions?
So what does religion represent to you?
Why should questions about earlier concepts of divinity and ancient accounts of Gods be relevant to questions about the rational integrity of present beliefs? If they do have relevance, then please specify what. If it is so important, why have you not done so?
Why should important belief systems not be questioned? And what tantrums? To give reasoned arguments against a belief system is scarcely a tantrum.
And I do not expect anyone to know all the answers but, if they answer none, then it is reasonable to assume that the answers do not exist, until someone appears who can provide such answers.
Anonymous
Harlypus, why do you constantly say people "fail" to answer your questions? The failure I think lies in you being a little too demanding that everything be proven to your liking. I dislike the roundabout thinbking where you debunk the very existence of something (God) simply because you define everything in YOUR terms of what "good" is.
You wrote: 2. Why cannot God change his mind? You have obviously not thought about the true nature of perfection and omnibenevolence. You are thinking of God in crude anthropomorphic terms. If God is good, he is perfectly good and cannot create something less than perfectly good. So there can be no need for a change. As Leibniz observed, all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds. You have not considered omniscience. How can God need a back up plan when he knows what is to happen? He ‘knew’ the earth would fall. The Fall is not good. Hence God is not good. Or does not exist."
If that is your logic, you need to reconsider that what is "good" for "all" is something beyond your comprehension. We do not learn full appreciation of pleasure without pain and would have no appreciation of mercy without suffering. The "good" in the fall was that God could unfold his mercy and forgiveness through Christ.
I'm sure you'll come up with something to counter this, but IT WILL NOT SUFFICE to show many YOUR "logic" is any more satisfying than a faith which many choose to live by.
and I won't be here to read it.
Peace.
You wrote: 2. Why cannot God change his mind? You have obviously not thought about the true nature of perfection and omnibenevolence. You are thinking of God in crude anthropomorphic terms. If God is good, he is perfectly good and cannot create something less than perfectly good. So there can be no need for a change. As Leibniz observed, all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds. You have not considered omniscience. How can God need a back up plan when he knows what is to happen? He ‘knew’ the earth would fall. The Fall is not good. Hence God is not good. Or does not exist."
If that is your logic, you need to reconsider that what is "good" for "all" is something beyond your comprehension. We do not learn full appreciation of pleasure without pain and would have no appreciation of mercy without suffering. The "good" in the fall was that God could unfold his mercy and forgiveness through Christ.
I'm sure you'll come up with something to counter this, but IT WILL NOT SUFFICE to show many YOUR "logic" is any more satisfying than a faith which many choose to live by.
and I won't be here to read it.
Peace.
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Harpalycus, we can go round and round on this forever, and perhaps one of God's ways of speaking, is by using me and others here and around you, as mouthpieces. Perhaps if you allow yourself to get to know God on a personal level, you'll get the answers to all the "why's" that you seek. We only see in part right now, and we must accept that God has a reason for everything, however unclear or unfair it seems at the moment, but we must also trust that He can turn any situation around for the good. Blessings can be found everywhere if you look for them .
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
To HollyDove.
I constantly say that people fail to answer questions simply because they don’t. And they are not marginal questions but go to the heart of the rationality and coherence of the Biblical worldview.
If claims lead to contradiction and incoherence then it is reasonable to ask for explanations. If these are not forthcoming then the assumption must be that they do not exist. The onus is always on the one making the positive claim. There is no accepted evidence that a God exists and therefore evidence, argument and answers should be forthcoming if the idea is to be even entertained.
You are totally incorrect to consider that I demand proof to my satisfaction. Firstly I do not demand proof. Proof is unachievable except with certain enclosed systems based upon agreed axioms such as logic and mathematics. Secondly, I consider that an answer merely needs to be possible.
Where have I defined good in my terms? Good is indeed a mutable term, but I have deliberately taken the commonly accepted Christian understanding of the concept. I would be grateful if you provide evidence of where this has not been the case.
Yes, that is indeed my logic. The actual ‘good for all’ is certainly beyond my comprehension, but such understanding is not necessary. Is there anyone who considers pain, terror and suffering as good? If we are agreed that there exists things that are not good (call them evil for simplicity) then how can a good God have created them? It is not my definition of good that I am foisting onto the argument.
Similarly your contention that we cannot learn the full appreciation of pleasure without pain is surely false. What prevents an omnipotent God providing that full appreciation without the concomitant suffering?
Then consider your statement that the Fall was good in that God could unfold his mercy and forgiveness. If there had been no fall then forgiveness and mercy would not have been needed. In what possible way can you justify the immense suffering of life to be there simply for God to show forgiveness? Moreover it implies that the Fall was deliberately engineered by God.
I am equally certain that whatever logical arguments are offered, they will not suffice to be more satisfying than your faith. That is not what the discussion is about. It is the rationality of that faith that is in question.
To Crazy Admirer.
We need to distinguish between free choice and free will. If my decision follows from my nature then it is determined and not free will. The impression of having free will is undeniable. Whether or not you have it is a different question.
To MadameLavender.
If there are answers to these questions then they should be available without having to get to know God on a personal level. If you have the answers then why do you not share them? You are accepting something on faith and then simply avoiding the criticisms by assuming there must be answers. If he can turn any situation round for the good, then why is there suffering?
Blessings be found everywhere? In the child with cystic fibrosis? In the homeless man dying of hypothermia? In the terrified, hunted fox? In the Boxing Day Tsunami? In the Black Death? In the First World War trenches? In the cat playing with a mouse?
I constantly say that people fail to answer questions simply because they don’t. And they are not marginal questions but go to the heart of the rationality and coherence of the Biblical worldview.
If claims lead to contradiction and incoherence then it is reasonable to ask for explanations. If these are not forthcoming then the assumption must be that they do not exist. The onus is always on the one making the positive claim. There is no accepted evidence that a God exists and therefore evidence, argument and answers should be forthcoming if the idea is to be even entertained.
You are totally incorrect to consider that I demand proof to my satisfaction. Firstly I do not demand proof. Proof is unachievable except with certain enclosed systems based upon agreed axioms such as logic and mathematics. Secondly, I consider that an answer merely needs to be possible.
Where have I defined good in my terms? Good is indeed a mutable term, but I have deliberately taken the commonly accepted Christian understanding of the concept. I would be grateful if you provide evidence of where this has not been the case.
Yes, that is indeed my logic. The actual ‘good for all’ is certainly beyond my comprehension, but such understanding is not necessary. Is there anyone who considers pain, terror and suffering as good? If we are agreed that there exists things that are not good (call them evil for simplicity) then how can a good God have created them? It is not my definition of good that I am foisting onto the argument.
Similarly your contention that we cannot learn the full appreciation of pleasure without pain is surely false. What prevents an omnipotent God providing that full appreciation without the concomitant suffering?
Then consider your statement that the Fall was good in that God could unfold his mercy and forgiveness. If there had been no fall then forgiveness and mercy would not have been needed. In what possible way can you justify the immense suffering of life to be there simply for God to show forgiveness? Moreover it implies that the Fall was deliberately engineered by God.
I am equally certain that whatever logical arguments are offered, they will not suffice to be more satisfying than your faith. That is not what the discussion is about. It is the rationality of that faith that is in question.
To Crazy Admirer.
We need to distinguish between free choice and free will. If my decision follows from my nature then it is determined and not free will. The impression of having free will is undeniable. Whether or not you have it is a different question.
To MadameLavender.
If there are answers to these questions then they should be available without having to get to know God on a personal level. If you have the answers then why do you not share them? You are accepting something on faith and then simply avoiding the criticisms by assuming there must be answers. If he can turn any situation round for the good, then why is there suffering?
Blessings be found everywhere? In the child with cystic fibrosis? In the homeless man dying of hypothermia? In the terrified, hunted fox? In the Boxing Day Tsunami? In the Black Death? In the First World War trenches? In the cat playing with a mouse?
Harpalycus: I did share my answers to what I know and have learned; if they aren't the ones you wanted to hear, then again, I say go meet God on a personal level. That's where the answers lie to us, on an individual basis, and why not get to know God personally? That seems an oxymoron in the sense that you want answers from God, but don't want to chat with Him to get them.
Why is there suffering? Why not? If everything were handed to you by God on a silver platter, then how would character be developed, how would strength and knowledge be developed? We'd be nothing more than boring little live dolls, that have everything downloaded into them, so what's the point of even being alive, then?
Yes, blessings everywhere--again, perspective. I'll use my daughter as an example: yes it sucked at the time she was born with a tumor in her eye, and we spent the first 5 years of her life, in and out of the hospital, getting rid of said tumor, even though it had already blinded her in the left eye before she was out of the womb. Later, in the early teen years, epilepsy set in with her, and we spent two years riding in ambulances, every Sunday night, up to the Emergency room. The blessing in all that: she's 19 and completely fine now, under control with meds, and doesn't know any different than how she sees with her one working eye. She has given her time, counseling friends/peers, who have had similar issues, by giving her experiences to them and how she managed to work through them. She helped a friend who is also blind in one eye, get her driver's license, by showing her some tricks she's learned herself, on how to drive a car, half blind. So there's the blessing: all the bad was turned around to be used for good.
How do you know that God isn't with the homeless man, or the fox, or those in wars? Just because you can't see him, doesn't mean he isn't there, and that the other party can't "see" or sense his presence. Personal basis, individual walks with God. Even the Holocaust--I'm sure God's heart was broken, seeing all those Jews exterminated, but look back into the Book of Isaiah and some of the other prophetic books of the Bible; it was prophesied that Israel would become a nation again, thousands of years ago, and it came to pass in 1948, that the Jews returned to their homeland of Israel and became a nation once more, albeit precipitated by WWII. We don't know all of how God works and why, but sometimes it's necessary to go through bad times to get his desired end product.
Why is there suffering? Why not? If everything were handed to you by God on a silver platter, then how would character be developed, how would strength and knowledge be developed? We'd be nothing more than boring little live dolls, that have everything downloaded into them, so what's the point of even being alive, then?
Yes, blessings everywhere--again, perspective. I'll use my daughter as an example: yes it sucked at the time she was born with a tumor in her eye, and we spent the first 5 years of her life, in and out of the hospital, getting rid of said tumor, even though it had already blinded her in the left eye before she was out of the womb. Later, in the early teen years, epilepsy set in with her, and we spent two years riding in ambulances, every Sunday night, up to the Emergency room. The blessing in all that: she's 19 and completely fine now, under control with meds, and doesn't know any different than how she sees with her one working eye. She has given her time, counseling friends/peers, who have had similar issues, by giving her experiences to them and how she managed to work through them. She helped a friend who is also blind in one eye, get her driver's license, by showing her some tricks she's learned herself, on how to drive a car, half blind. So there's the blessing: all the bad was turned around to be used for good.
How do you know that God isn't with the homeless man, or the fox, or those in wars? Just because you can't see him, doesn't mean he isn't there, and that the other party can't "see" or sense his presence. Personal basis, individual walks with God. Even the Holocaust--I'm sure God's heart was broken, seeing all those Jews exterminated, but look back into the Book of Isaiah and some of the other prophetic books of the Bible; it was prophesied that Israel would become a nation again, thousands of years ago, and it came to pass in 1948, that the Jews returned to their homeland of Israel and became a nation once more, albeit precipitated by WWII. We don't know all of how God works and why, but sometimes it's necessary to go through bad times to get his desired end product.
Thank you for your advice, but the answers that are required are comprehensible answers to simple questions.
If God is the good and supreme creator how is there ‘evil’ in the world?
How can you justify free will as being important enough to justify all this suffering?
How can a perfect creation in a perfect environment make an imperfect choice?
Why does a loving God visit pain and suffering on us?
You have given one of the standard answers. But it does not work. You assume that suffering is necessary for character building. Apart from the fact that suffering ‘destroys’ character as much, if not more than it builds it, why cannot an omnipotent God give you the necessary character without any suffering?
This familiar but ridiculous jibe against us being robots, in that case, needs to be considered rather than simply repeated. If someone has a certain character then you tell me how you could tell whether that character was created by suffering or placed there by God? Whichever, it would be the same personality, the same responses, emotions, thoughts. If you are a boring little live doll if God does it, then in what way are you not a boring little live doll when the interplay between environment and genetics does it? Think about it.
You give me an example. Let me give you one. Orcas hunt young grey whales. They harry the mother and its young for hours or even days, until they can separate the terrified youngster from its exhausted mother. They then force the youngster under the surface and keep it there until it drowns. They hurl ‘captured’ seals into the air to weaken them and then leave them for their young to learn how to kill. Now, where are the blessings here?
I do not know that God isn’t with the suffering, but if one was in the presence of suffering and could make it stop, and chooses not to do so, would you not regard that as immoral? I certainly do. And are you seriously arguing that the dreadful suffering and death of six million Jews, men, women and children, can possibly be counterbalanced by the founding of a Jewish Homeland. Especially as that homeland was born in death and conflict as well, is still causing death and conflict and could have been created by divine fiat. And why did the Jews need a homeland? Why did God promise them a homeland that was occupied by others? Why did he require the genocide to give the original land to the Hebrews?
To sum up. You end by saying ‘sometimes it's necessary to go through bad times to get his desired end’. No, it isn’t. It is not necessary. By definition. God is omnipotent, remember. He can do anything. He can achieve the desired end without bad times. That is why the entire concept of an Abrahamic God founders on the rock of pain and suffering. There is no possible justification that can be offered. Which is exactly why the mystery card is played so often. It is the only one held.
If God is the good and supreme creator how is there ‘evil’ in the world?
How can you justify free will as being important enough to justify all this suffering?
How can a perfect creation in a perfect environment make an imperfect choice?
Why does a loving God visit pain and suffering on us?
You have given one of the standard answers. But it does not work. You assume that suffering is necessary for character building. Apart from the fact that suffering ‘destroys’ character as much, if not more than it builds it, why cannot an omnipotent God give you the necessary character without any suffering?
This familiar but ridiculous jibe against us being robots, in that case, needs to be considered rather than simply repeated. If someone has a certain character then you tell me how you could tell whether that character was created by suffering or placed there by God? Whichever, it would be the same personality, the same responses, emotions, thoughts. If you are a boring little live doll if God does it, then in what way are you not a boring little live doll when the interplay between environment and genetics does it? Think about it.
You give me an example. Let me give you one. Orcas hunt young grey whales. They harry the mother and its young for hours or even days, until they can separate the terrified youngster from its exhausted mother. They then force the youngster under the surface and keep it there until it drowns. They hurl ‘captured’ seals into the air to weaken them and then leave them for their young to learn how to kill. Now, where are the blessings here?
I do not know that God isn’t with the suffering, but if one was in the presence of suffering and could make it stop, and chooses not to do so, would you not regard that as immoral? I certainly do. And are you seriously arguing that the dreadful suffering and death of six million Jews, men, women and children, can possibly be counterbalanced by the founding of a Jewish Homeland. Especially as that homeland was born in death and conflict as well, is still causing death and conflict and could have been created by divine fiat. And why did the Jews need a homeland? Why did God promise them a homeland that was occupied by others? Why did he require the genocide to give the original land to the Hebrews?
To sum up. You end by saying ‘sometimes it's necessary to go through bad times to get his desired end’. No, it isn’t. It is not necessary. By definition. God is omnipotent, remember. He can do anything. He can achieve the desired end without bad times. That is why the entire concept of an Abrahamic God founders on the rock of pain and suffering. There is no possible justification that can be offered. Which is exactly why the mystery card is played so often. It is the only one held.
Yup, and hence why the only thing I have left to add, is that I teach chemistry too, Harpalycus, and I believe there's room for God among science and not everything needs a proven scientifical answer. For me, it's enough to just believe, and know that there's a hope beyond what we can see and touch right now.
All belief systems should be subject to analysis and criticism. Or we would live on a flat earth believing in an animistic religion and shamans.
What has teaching chemistry to do with it? (it is a question of rational analysis of claims) Who has said that there is no room for God in a world view that also contains science? (I am careful with my language as there is no room for God in science – which is a different thing altogether). Who has said anything needs to be proved? (I have already made myself clear about that) Who has said that everything needs a proven scientific answer? Who has said that there cannot be anything beyond the empirical? These are the usual crop of straw men that are wheeled out, at such times, to provide the necessary confusion. Beliefs and positions are attributed to others, which are not actually held.
The situation is quite clear.
A series of metaphysical claims is made concerning a belief system.
That belief system contains, as far as I can see, obvious and massive contradictions, incoherencies and inherent implausibilities.
When these are pointed out they are met with unsatisfactory answers that do not address the fundamental difficulties. That is not to say that they cannot be answered. I am looking for such answers. So far they have not appeared.
They are met with manifest avoidance of many of the questions.
Or with ad hominem arguments, straw men and fallacious reasoning.
And finally, with the well worn mystery and faith cards.
‘An unexamined life is not worth living.’ Attributed to Socrates.
What has teaching chemistry to do with it? (it is a question of rational analysis of claims) Who has said that there is no room for God in a world view that also contains science? (I am careful with my language as there is no room for God in science – which is a different thing altogether). Who has said anything needs to be proved? (I have already made myself clear about that) Who has said that everything needs a proven scientific answer? Who has said that there cannot be anything beyond the empirical? These are the usual crop of straw men that are wheeled out, at such times, to provide the necessary confusion. Beliefs and positions are attributed to others, which are not actually held.
The situation is quite clear.
A series of metaphysical claims is made concerning a belief system.
That belief system contains, as far as I can see, obvious and massive contradictions, incoherencies and inherent implausibilities.
When these are pointed out they are met with unsatisfactory answers that do not address the fundamental difficulties. That is not to say that they cannot be answered. I am looking for such answers. So far they have not appeared.
They are met with manifest avoidance of many of the questions.
Or with ad hominem arguments, straw men and fallacious reasoning.
And finally, with the well worn mystery and faith cards.
‘An unexamined life is not worth living.’ Attributed to Socrates.
