lynx wrote:
> 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.
>
Yes, likewise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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?
>
There is good biblical precedent. Look at the book of Job in the OT.
>>
>> (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.
>
Yes. But we humans do a pretty good job of making it worse, much worse.
Chris
|
