Challenge; Can you argue a case you don't actually agree with?

[What if...?]

There is no compassion without suffering. I don't understand why you're distinguishing between different forms/causes of suffering when the question is "Why does a loving God allow people to suffer?"

Men impose plenty of suffering on each other, natural disasters, injuries, aging, etc etc for "compassion practise". Horrid diseases and my "favorite", babies who are born so defective they die screaming shortly after birth seems like overkill.

My cosmology explains these extremes in the context of participating in physical manifestations in order to experience everything that CAN be experienced in spacetime universes.

But in the "Yahweh" model we have an absentee father who expects perfect behavior without any input from him in an extremely complex reality under penalty of eternal suffering.

It simply sounds too much like the most successful con game of all time. Yahweh is way too much Luke the worst of humans. The kind who would "forge" a god just like them to excuse their excesses.

 

[sangha]

Men impose plenty of suffering on each other, natural disasters, injuries, aging, etc etc for "compassion practise". Horrid diseases and my "favorite", babies who are born so defective they die screaming shortly after birth seems like overkill.

My cosmology explains these extremes in the context of participating in physical manifestations in order to experience everything that CAN be experienced in spacetime universes.

Yes, there are many forms of suffering. Some created by humans, and some not.

But in the "Yahweh" model we have an absentee father who expects perfect behavior without any input from him in an extremely complex reality under penalty of eternal suffering.

It simply sounds too much like the most successful con game of all time. Yahweh is way too much Luke the worst of humans. The kind who would "forge" a god just like them to excuse their excesses.

While there are certainly people who have a poorly thought out conception of God, I don't think christianity requires the belief in a God who expects us to be perfect. Instead, it promotes the belief in a God who wants us to strive to be better, particularly towards each other. Going after those with the most extreme of religious beliefs is basically "picking the lowest hanging fruit"; not necessarily wrong, but one should aspire for something greater once one has grown.

 

[phattonez]

Who made those humans and failed to stop them from failing, if not God?

An omnipotent God is responsible for everything that happens or doesn't happen anytime, anywhere in our vast universe. Or He's not omnipotent and isn't really God.

Pretty frickin' simple.

An omnipotent being can be responsible for everything, but need not be responsible for everything that occurs if that is of His own choosing. God can force us to act, but does not choose to make decisions for us.

 

[phattonez]

Knives have nothing to do with why a compassionate loving god would create diseases that are so horrible that they are like something out of a science fiction horror film.

Oh, so you think that genetic mutations serve no purpose?

 

[phattonez]

Why are there "errors" in a "perfect" creation?

Those errors also lead to benefits, like with malaria resistance being affoded by a single point mutation.

 

[shrubnose]

An omnipotent being can be responsible for everything, but need not be responsible for everything that occurs if that is of His own choosing.

God can force us to act, but does not choose to make decisions for us.

When God knows that man's actions will turn out very bad, but does nothing, who is responsible for the bad result?

 

[Removable Mind]

The reason religion exist: Human fear and gullibility - that is relieved by ancient stories that there is an entity, which gives us an eternal life if we just believe that the entity exists and are willing to beg for our lives, beg for it to take away our suffering, and end or control our self-will, which is used to defy the wishes of the entity, which will lead us to our damnation if we don't comply.

Hey, the story's been selling tickets for a long time. As long as it sells...a lot of people are willing to take the money.

 

[Gathomas88]

How could an omnipotent god screw planet Earth up so bad that he had to send his son, Jesus Christ to try to straighten out the mess?

Explain that, if you can. :roll:

Free will.

Arguably, the current state of the world is "all part of the plan" anyway.

 

[phattonez]

When God knows that man's actions will turn out very bad, but does nothing, who is responsible for the bad result?

The one who performs the action is the guilty party. This is part of the deal with free will.

 

[phattonez]

Free will.

Arguably, the current state of the world is "all part of the plan" anyway.

I love this part of the Exsultet proclaimed at every Easter Vigil.

O love, O charity beyond all telling,
to ransom a slave you gave away your Son!

O truly necessary sin of Adam,
destroyed completely by the Death of Christ!

O happy fault
that earned for us so great, so glorious a Redeemer!

 

[phattonez]

The reason religion exist: Human fear and gullibility - that is relieved by ancient stories that there is an entity, which gives us an eternal life if we just believe that the entity exists and are willing to beg for our lives, beg for it to take away our suffering, and end or control our self-will, which is used to defy the wishes of the entity, which will lead us to our damnation if we don't comply.

Hey, the story's been selling tickets for a long time. As long as it sells...a lot of people are willing to take the money.

Is it irremovable intelligence when you base an opinion on nothing but speculation and present it as fact?

 

[CRUE CAB]

You're taking off work for a pulled muscle?

That is something I can argue.

 

[Removable Mind]

Is it irremovable intelligence when you base an opinion on nothing but speculation and present it as fact?

Now, now...don't be offended. I know the true is sometimes stranger than fiction.

 

[Quag]

I am not Christian....
but I can provide an argument for you. I LOVE devil's advocate.

I'm pretty sure it's Free will... God chooses not to interfere with free will... and we messed it up ourselves.

Free will isnt an argument for God it is a coutner argument against those that say if God is omniscient/omnipotent then he already knows how the workd will turn out and any failings on our part are failings on his as he created us.
It doesnt prove God it just excuses him for bad people and bad things.

 

[phattonez]

Now, now...don't be offended. I know the true is sometimes stranger than fiction.

You're willing to accept something as true with no evidence, but then you reject the evidence that Christians offer for their faith?

 

[phattonez]

Free will isnt an argument for God it is a coutner argument against those that say if God is omniscient/omnipotent then he already knows how the workd will turn out and any failings on our part are failings on his as he created us.
It doesnt prove God it just excuses him for bad people and bad things.

Except for the fact that free will is self-evident. It's not a creation of theologians.

 

[Removable Mind]

You're willing to accept something as true with no evidence, but then you reject the evidence that Christians offer for their faith?

I'm an atheist.

 

[phattonez]

I'm an atheist.

And that apparently makes you incapable of identifying irony.

 

[Removable Mind]

And that apparently makes you incapable of identifying irony.

None needed. How can you apply irony to something that doesn't exist?

 

[What if...?]

Those errors also lead to benefits, like with malaria resistance being affoded by a single point mutation.

Why not introduce some kind of limitations to avoid extreme suffering? "He" was starting from scratch.

I believe the university is a creation. I just don't buy jahweh as the entity responsible.

He is EXACTLY the kind of being jerks would make up to cover their misbehavior. That's problematic.

 

[phattonez]

Why not introduce some kind of limitations to avoid extreme suffering? "He" was starting from scratch.

Such as what? If you're going to criticize then let's hear specific alternatives.

 

[Quag]

Except for the fact that free will is self-evident. It's not a creation of theologians.

Irrelevant whether you accept free will or not, it doesnt prove God. It is merely a counter-argument against the argument that God cannot be omniscient/omipotent if God created a world that isnt perfect.

 

[Removable Mind]

Free will.

Arguably, the current state of the world is "all part of the plan" anyway.

Mr. Thomas. One question. Don't know if you know the answer, but just asking for your opinion.

How is it possible for mere humans to determine the difference between divine intervention vs and act of free will - regardless of an observed behavior or event by individuals or nations? I say "nations" because I assume that some humans have the right to override or coerce another in a way that prevents others from engaging in behaviors that are derived from "free will". For example: Governments sending citizens into war for the purpose of killing others.

I suggest that the only way it would be possible for a human being to know the difference between divine intervention and act of free will would be to have direct access to god's entire plan for all of eternity.

However...

A safe way of looking at this concept is: Everything that happens is being orchestrated exactly by THE PLAN - no matter how bizarre, cruel or disgusting the behaviors and events that unfold in front of our eyes. Therefore we just accept it.

Now my previous sentence would be great if every person looked at human behaviors in that light. It would save themselves from having to be so judgmental about their fellow beings.

Man, I'd hate to be in charge of The Plan.

Thank you, Mr. Thomas...and my post isn't a direct criticism of your post. It just raised a lot of questions...and I only hit you with just one them.

 

[phattonez]

Irrelevant whether you accept free will or not, it doesnt prove God. It is merely a counter-argument against the argument that God cannot be omniscient/omipotent if God created a world that isnt perfect.

I wasn't trying to prove God with this argument, just arguing against the idea that everything should be perfect in the world that was created by God.

 

[phattonez]

Mr. Thomas. One question. Don't know if you know the answer, but just asking for your opinion.

How is it possible for mere humans to determine the difference between divine intervention vs and act of free will - regardless of an observed behavior or event by individuals or nations? I say "nations" because I assume that some humans have the right to override or coerce another in a way that prevents others from engaging in behaviors that are derived from "free will". For example: Governments sending citizens into war for the purpose of killing others.

I suggest that the only way it would be possible for a human being to know the difference between divine intervention and act of free will would be to have direct access to god's entire plan for all of eternity.

However...

A safe way of looking at this concept is: Everything that happens is being orchestrated exactly by THE PLAN - no matter how bizarre, cruel or disgusting the behaviors and events that unfold in front of our eyes. Therefore we just accept it.

Now my previous sentence would be great if every person looked at human behaviors in that light. It would save themselves from having to be so judgmental about their fellow beings.

Man, I'd hate to be in charge of The Plan.

Thank you, Mr. Thomas...and my post isn't a direct criticism of your post. It just raised a lot of questions...and I only hit you with just one them.

When something happens that is contrary to what we know about nature, then that would be your first clue that it is a divine intervention.