Chris Bell wrote:
> lynx wrote:
>> Chris Bell wrote:
>>
>>> lynx wrote:
>>>
>>>> Chris Bell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> lynx wrote:
>>>>>
>
> *snip*
>>>>>> It limits your thinking, and the 'who am I' attitude is
>>>>>> psychologically harmful as it's a put down of oneself. It can
>>>>>> facilitate a mindset that is not beneficial.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I generally agree with that, but I think that God is beyond your
>>>>> or my comprehension, and that makes this a different situation. If
>>>>> you look through the bible and ask the question "why does God do
>>>>> that", it gets pretty difficult to answer at many points.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fair comment, however the simplest answer is simply that God does
>>>> not exist.
>>>>
>>> I seem to remember discussing this point at length some time ago
>>> (was it with Sean?). My position is still that the default position
>>> is that God exists, based on numbers as much as anything else. There
>>> are very few atheists around.
>>
>>
>> Human beings seem to be made that way. I know I am.
>>
> Which way?
>
disposed toward belief in God.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> What I think is dangerous is when you don't question those who
>>>>>>> claim to speak for God.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What makes you think that the suffering of mankind should be
>>>>>>>>> an overriding concern of God?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So your position is that God is happy to allow his creations to
>>>>>>>> die and suffer in pain and misery. What does that say about God?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, I am not saying that. I am saying that God suffers with us
>>>>>>> in our pain and misery.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So God is not omnipotent.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't say that. I don't actually think that is a relevant
>>>>> question to ask. I certainly don't see any evidence that he is, or
>>>>> that he isn't.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If God is suffering then presumably he is unable to alleviate His
>>>> suffering.
>>>>
>>> Or chooses to suffer with his creatures.
>>
>>
>> With all due respect, all arguments for the reasons why God doesn't
>> act, seem to me to be just attempts to avoid the simple explanation
>> that God does not exist.
>>
> That is certainly an explanation. In the end, you either have faith in
> God or you don't, and there can be no proof either way. Those who have
> spiritual experiences have a similar choice but are looking for a
> possible explanation for those experiences, and often choose God.
ok.
>
> To go back to the original subject, most mothers and fathers love and
> care for their children, but will often stand back to let their child
> have a painful experience so that they learn from it. Why should God
> not do likewise?
You mean like the little girl on the news last nite with a grotesque
tumor the size of a football growing on her face, so she can lean the
what it's like to suffer pain, humiliation, and degradation? or like
losing ones family in an earthquake or other natural disaster so one can
learn the meaning of grief, personal loss, and tragedy? Like that you
mean?
>
> (As an aside, it is interesting that medical research is now finding
> that young children need to get sick from the various normal childhood
> viruses or else their immune systems ramp up their sensitivity to the
> point where autoimmune diseases like diabetes and asthma start. It
> seems we are made to get ill.)
... and God doesn't mind. In fact He made us that way, right? ergo God is
responsible for human suffering.
>
>
> Chris
--
rgds,
Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com/
'I'm not young enough to know everything' -Oscar Wilde
|
