• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How Do Christians Reconcile The Following Question Regarding Their Faith?

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
That's not a fair comparison. Really, what I was getting at is just one part of a larger question: how could the Earth end up in a state that God does not find desirable?

From what I gather, you don't believe in an "omnimax" God, so I'm not sure that this is a problem for your theology. If God did as well as he could with what he had available to him, then the moral dilemma disappears.


They're two sides of the same coin. Part of what makes an act reprehensible is its effects; if an act no longer causes harm, then it's no longer reprehensible.


Wait... if you consider free will to only be about the desire to act and not necessarily the act itself, then how was your response to Buttercup relevant? She was acting about actual harmful acts, not just the desire to commit them. If the requirements of free will are satisfied by allowing people the desire to, say, murder, but free will doesn't require people to actually commit murder, then you could have a world that's completely murder-free but where free will is entirely preserved.

Also, if free will is a matter of desire, then our free will is already limited, too. We don't want anything and everything. I like the way that Penn Jillette put it (quoting from memory, so I may be off a bit): "I murder as much as I want to murder; it's just that the amount of murder I want to commit is zero." When we already desire some things but not others, how would it hamper our free will to desire fewer bad things and more good things than we do now?
You know, I kind of had a hunch that my answer would fail to satisfy you. You like to debate this topic, but I don't. Whenever this subject is raised, the conversation just goes around in circles. It's not going to matter what I say. You're just going to pick my post apart like you always do. I realize that's the point of debate, but I'm not here to debate the topic. It's not my intention to convince anybody that I'm right and they're wrong. I'm just trying to answer Buttercup's question in a way that, if nothing else, will at least make my perspective clear to her. If she thinks what I'm saying is irrelevant, she can tell me so. Until I decide that she and I can't have any more of a constructive conversation than you and I can, I'll keep making the effort -- but only in response to her questions. If you get something out of what I say to her, that's great. If not, that's okay, too. Multiple questions, all designed to back me into a corner, just make me want to say, "Hell, why bother?" Once Buttercup has responded to the one question I asked her, I'll continue to discuss the topic with her. No hard feelings. I just don't like discussions that go nowhere.
 
Last edited:

Buttercup

Veteran Member
I'm going to get back to you, I promise. But I'm going to tell you right now that the only reason I am is that we're friends, and I know you're not just trying to argumentative.
I realize my OP could be viewed as a hostile question. I'm asking with genuine curiosity and not one ounce of bad intent.
Obviously, I'm going to be coming from the LDS perspective, which is a bit more multi-faceted than the typical mainstream Christian perspective, so you're going to have to expect a few lengthy, Katzpur-style posts if I'm going to explain it.
Good, I'll look forward to it. One thing I admire about LDS doctrine is that a person still has opportunity to come to God after death. That's absolutely missing in mainstream Christianity.

But, meanwhile, you're going to have to refresh my memory. I know you used to be a Christian. As a recall, you were a Christian when we first met. Do you still believe in God? If you do, what are your own gut feelings about Him? Who or what is He really? I'm not talking about the God you were raised to believe in. I'm talking about the God you do believe in -- if He exists at all. I would appreciate it if you would read and comment on the following quote:

"If it really is true that [humans are] merely the inevitable culmination of an improbable chemical reaction... involv[ing] 'merely material' atoms, then the fact that [we] have been able to formulate the idea of 'an improbable chemical reaction' and to trace [ourselves] back to it is remarkable indeed. That chemicals which are 'merely material' should come to understand their own nature is a staggering supposition."
I currently define myself as agnostic. In my view, there's probably less than a 1% chance that the God of the Bible is a true, live entity. Regarding answering the posted quote, I'm not trying to sound snotty but I don't care much about 'how' we came into being. It's a fascinating scientific topic to study and the theories are changing all the time depending on new evidences discovered, but in the grand scheme of things, our initial appearance on the earth is not all that important to me other than from an evolutionary and anthropological angle.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
The standard response to that is to ask if there's free will in Heaven.

- if the answer's "yes", then free will doesn't necessarily require the existence of evil.
- if the answer's "no", then God doesn't actually care about free will over the long run.

Either way, the argument you gave doesn't work.
Exactly. It's obvious God has the capacity to create a utopia where there is no murder, no starvation, no natural catastrophes. That's what Heaven is, right? So, why do we have to go through all this crap first? Why is he so mean? What's his motive? Creating humans with the heinous capacities we have and then tossing in free will as a get out of jail free card seems like a weak plotted horror story.
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
That's absolutely missing in mainstream Christianity.
Christianity seems to be filled with exclusionists. They take the concept of "my way or the highway" to an extreme. The scriptures teach me that The only way to God is to emulate him. It doesn't matter how successful I am... faith the size of a mustard seed is sufficient. Just love your fellow man as best you can. Good will do the rest. Then you can see through the hypocrisy of organized religions and be content with just being one with God.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
You seem to be forgetting the Genesis story. God did not make us murderers, We made ourselves that way.
Who designed us, according to your views? When an engineer designs a specific function for a machine, he expects the function to be used. Why add it otherwise?
I was never trying to argue that God is moral...
Isn't God the inventor of morals? I'm not sure where you're going with that statement. I'm still trying to have a conversation with you and I hope this post works. :)
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
You know, I kind of had a hunch that my answer would fail to satisfy you. You like to debate this topic, but I don't. Whenever this subject is raised, the conversation just goes around in circles. It's not going to matter what I say. You're just going to pick my post apart like you always do. I realize that's the point of debate, but I'm not here to debate the topic. It's not my intention to convince anybody that I'm right and they're wrong. I'm just trying to answer Buttercup's question in a way that, if nothing else, will at least make my perspective clear to her. If she thinks what I'm saying is irrelevant, she can tell me so. Until I decide that she and I can't have any more of a constructive conversation than you and I can, I'll keep making the effort -- but only in response to her questions. If you get something out of what I say to her, that's great. If not, that's okay, too. Multiple questions, all designed to back me into a corner, just make me want to say, "Hell, why bother?" Once Buttercup has responded to the one question I asked her, I'll continue to discuss the topic with her. No hard feelings. I just don't like discussions that go nowhere.
I want to say "why bother" too, but for different reasons.

I've been thinking about this for a while now. I suppose now's as good a time as any to bring it up. Sorry to dump all of this on you, especially since it isn't really about you:

Realistically, I know I'll never be a theist. At this point, I don't talk about religion and gods to try to convince myself; I do it to try to find a way to still have respect for the religious beliefs of others.

Despite reading religious texts and talking to believers for a long time, I've never found a single one who's been able to give a reasonable justification for their beliefs and never found an intellectually honest way to arrive at any religious belief system. Not once. The best I've ever seen is variations on "you can't prove that my beliefs are false!" It's starting to wear me down a bit.

Maybe it's irrational on my part, but I don't want to resign myself to the conclusion that the core beliefs of the majority of the planet are based on foolishness, lies, and unfounded assumptions. I would love to have someone explain some tenet of their religion to me in a way where I could say "all right - even though I don't agree with your premises, I see why you might accept them and agree that your conclusion flows from them."

So... that's why I might bombard you with questions from time to time: you've always struck me as an intelligent person who's put a lot of thought into her faith, so you stand as good a shot of anyone of giving me an example - my first example - of reasonable religious faith. All of the questions I ask you about your beliefs are only about things that I consider necessary to establish that what you're saying is reasonable.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

Hi ya, Katz! Big hug for you, sweetie!

I understand your analogy, believe me. I lived with the morals of free choice for a long time. I don't see the Abrahamic God in the same way anymore (obviously, ha!) According to Christianity, God is our creator and designer, right? You don't see a problem with a designer purposefully creating a man who rapes, murders and dismembers a child all the while sitting back, watching and doing nothing about it? I realize you think this man has a choice, and you're correct, he does. However, why create a monster like this in the first place? My question to you, personally is, how do you reconcile that with your worship and faith in Him? I'd love to hear an answer deeper than "free will" from a Christian. I know we have choices. That's the easy part. What is God's motive for creating man the way he is?

I realize my OP could be viewed as a hostile question. I'm asking with genuine curiosity and not one ounce of bad intent. Good, I'll look forward to it. One thing I admire about LDS doctrine is that a person still has opportunity to come to God after death. That's absolutely missing in mainstream Christianity.

I currently define myself as agnostic. In my view, there's probably less than a 1% chance that the God of the Bible is a true, live entity. Regarding answering the posted quote, I'm not trying to sound snotty but I don't care much about 'how' we came into being. It's a fascinating scientific topic to study and the theories are changing all the time depending on new evidences discovered, but in the grand scheme of things, our initial appearance on the earth is not all that important to me other than from an evolutionary and anthropological angle.
I'm really not sure how to approach this question, but I don't view it as hostile, since none of my past interactions with you have been hostile in the slightest. You know I'm inclined to be long-winded, and I really do try not to be. But when I manage to be brief, I usually leave out something that turns out to be important. So, I just ask you to be patient with me in my efforts to somehow be both concise and thorough.

Let me explain. Mormons believe that God created us for 100% unselfish purposes. His ultimate goal was that we come to find everlasting joy and have potential beyond our wildest dreams. That doesn't just happen. It's a lengthy and sometimes painful process. You know already that we believe that death does not mark the end, with regards to our progress and our opportunity to change and learn and grow. One LDS Apostle put it this way: "The more you understand about the gospel of Jesus Christ, the more you come to realize that endings here in mortality really aren't endings at all." I don't know if you're aware of our belief that, just as death is not the end, birth is not the beginning. We believe that God created us as spirit beings before we came to earth to receive mortal bodies. That is important to understand, because we also believe that we had a choice as to whether we wanted to come here or not. I realize that is so far out in left-field when it comes to traditional Christian doctrine, but it's what we believe was taught and understood by Christians anciently. We came here with an understanding that life was not going to be all that easy and that, in fact, for many of us, it would be one long, miserable experience. So why would we choose it, knowing what we did about what it might be like? We chose it because we understood that it was a necessary step in our eternal progress. We wanted to ultimately be like our Father in Heaven, and we trusted Him when He told us this was actually what He wanted for each of us. I point this out because, even though we may experience tremendous pain and suffering at the hands of depraved human beings, we knew that in the end, all wrongs would be righted and all losses made up to us. And then, we'd be able to start on the path of true eternal progression.

We believe that everyone who has ever been born or will ever be born chose to be born. That includes the murderers, the rapists and all of the other dregs of the earth. None of these people started out as monsters. They made choices that made them become monsters. They weren't born sinners, but were born pure and innocent. Sure, God knew that some of them would make horrendous choices, but they were His children, too, and they wanted to experience mortality. When God cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, He said, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." As "one of us"? Who would "us" be if not the Father and the Son? One of the attributes of godhood is a knowledge of both good and evil, and by eating the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve had taken the first step towards becoming like their Father in Heaven. Their Fall was, in reality, a "fortunate fall" or, as it is phrased in Latin, a "felix culpa."

God placed them in a world where both good and evil existed. They would have to learn to discern between the two and make good choices, as each of us must do. If no one were permitted to make poor choices, how would any of us learn anything about evil? How is good even good if there is nothing with which to compare it? You ask why would God create someone who "rapes, murders and dismembers a child, all the while sitting back, watching and doing nothing about it." Have you asked yourself when, exactly, He should step in and stop this from happening? Should He prevent the evil before it happens? If so, how? By simply zapping the monster before he ever did anything monstrous? Or by zapping him immediately afterwards? If He were to miraculously keep the murderer from committing his crime, wouldn't people then be justified in saying, "What's up with God anyway? That man didn't do a thing, and God just struck him dead for no reason?" It's not as if the monster is ultimately going to get off Scot free. Justice will eventually be served.

Another thought... Are you suggesting that God not allow men to commit any evil at all, or would you just somehow restrict it to "less evil"? Where would He draw the line? Would it be okay for a parent to verbally abuse his kid? Could he get away with slapping his kid across the face? How about beating him up? How about torturing him? How about killing him? I'm assuming that you'd say that one of these things crosses the line between acceptable and unacceptable. Are you absolutely sure where that line should be drawn? We see this life as a mere spec on a timeline of our existence that's going to never, ever end. The trials we experience in mortality will be like a single drop of water in the ocean when we've moved on to the next part of our existence. Our existence is about becoming perfect, not as starting out that way.

I am flat out just rambling at this point. I don't know if any of this is going to help you understand why I can worship this God. I could try to explain it in other ways, and I will if you still have questions and want me to try. Otherwise, I don't want to just go on talking for nothing.
 

Thana

Lady
Who designed us, according to your views? When an engineer designs a specific function for a machine, he expects the function to be used. Why add it otherwise?
Isn't God the inventor of morals? I'm not sure where you're going with that statement. I'm still trying to have a conversation with you and I hope this post works. :)

To give the consumers a choice? For preference sake? I suppose many reasons.
And did God really invent morals or did He just create creatures with the capability for inventing and comprehending the concept of morality?

And I'm sorry, I didn't mean to miss anything, what did you want to have a conversation about?
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I want to say "why bother" too, but for different reasons.

I've been thinking about this for a while now. I suppose now's as good a time as any to bring it up. Sorry to dump all of this on you, especially since it isn't really about you:

Realistically, I know I'll never be a theist. At this point, I don't talk about religion and gods to try to convince myself; I do it to try to find a way to still have respect for the religious beliefs of others.
*sigh*

I don't know what to say. I hate to simply refuse to talk to anyone who is genuinely interested in learning something. On the other hand, I really do feel as if you just like to argue for the sake of arguing. If I'm wrong, I apologize. I hope you realize that I have never seen you as a "project" -- convert this atheist and get 1 million brownie points. I honestly believe the chances of you becoming a theist are just about the same as mine of becoming an atheist are. It's not going to happen. I think it might help you to have respect for the religious beliefs of others if you were to simply realize that some people were born with an inclination towards belief and some were born with an inclination towards disbelief. While this may surprise you, I actually have tried to consider the possibility that there is no God and that we are just a bunch of random molecules functioning through a series electrical impulses. That's why I asked Buttercup for her comments on a statement I quoted. I don't think she quite got my reason for asking, so I'll ask you to comment on the same quote. It was this:

"If it really is true that [humans are] merely the inevitable culmination of an improbable chemical reaction... involv[ing] 'merely material' atoms, then the fact that [we] have been able to formulate the idea of 'an improbable chemical reaction' and to trace [ourselves] back to it is remarkable indeed. That chemicals which are 'merely material' should come to understand their own nature is a staggering supposition."

It seems to me that this statement would have to make any atheist stop and think, "Yeah, how is this possible?" I know that I can't answer the question without conceding the likelihood of a creator. While I have no trouble questioning certain things about Mormonism, per se, or even certain things about Christianity in general, what I simply cannot do is seriously believe that there is not a Higher Power out there. I have honestly tried to convince myself that God may be a figment of my imagination, probably every bit as hard as you've tried to consider that He might be real.

Despite reading religious texts and talking to believers for a long time, I've never found a single one who's been able to give a reasonable justification for their beliefs and never found an intellectually honest way to arrive at any religious belief system. Not once. The best I've ever seen is variations on "you can't prove that my beliefs are false!" It's starting to wear me down a bit.
I can understand that. Can you understand why it wears me down to constantly be goaded to "prove" something that can't be proven?

Maybe it's irrational on my part, but I don't want to resign myself to the conclusion that the core beliefs of the majority of the planet are based on foolishness, lies, and unfounded assumptions. I would love to have someone explain some tenet of their religion to me in a way where I could say "all right - even though I don't agree with your premises, I see why you might accept them and agree that your conclusion flows from them."
Well, that's probably not going to happen -- at least not in this life. However, let me give you a hypothetical situation. If you were to die, but were to discover that you were still a cognizant entity (just existing apart from the physical body you now have), with a greater capacity to understand the spiritual realm and the divine more than you do right now, would you take the opportunity to do so? I bet you would. Well, despite what the rest of Christianity may tell you, my belief is that's exactly what's going to happen. You may have to wait a few more years, but since I'm assuming you have no desire to die right away, maybe it would be a good thing for you to just not concern yourself with why you don't and can't believe right here and now.

So... that's why I might bombard you with questions from time to time: you've always struck me as an intelligent person who's put a lot of thought into her faith, so you stand as good a shot of anyone of giving me an example - my first example - of reasonable religious faith. All of the questions I ask you about your beliefs are only about things that I consider necessary to establish that what you're saying is reasonable.
Okay, well, flattery will obviously get you a second chance. I can't say how long it will be before you wear me down to nothing, but I'll give it another shot.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
*sigh*

I don't know what to say. I hate to simply refuse to talk to anyone who is genuinely interested in learning something. On the other hand, I really do feel as if you just like to argue for the sake of arguing. If I'm wrong, I apologize. I hope you realize that I have never seen you as a "project" -- convert this atheist and get 1 million brownie points.
Of course.

I honestly believe the chances of you becoming a theist are just about the same as mine of becoming an atheist are. It's not going to happen. I think it might help you to have respect for the religious beliefs of others if you were to simply realize that some people were born with an inclination towards belief and some were born with an inclination towards disbelief.
I have considered that. It had the opposite effect: http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/extremes-of-atheism-vs-theism.159432/page-11#post-3661671

While this may surprise you, I actually have tried to consider the possibility that there is no God and that we are just a bunch of random molecules functioning through a series electrical impulses. That's why I asked Buttercup for her comments on a statement I quoted. I don't think she quite got my reason for asking, so I'll ask you to comment on the same quote. It was this:

"If it really is true that [humans are] merely the inevitable culmination of an improbable chemical reaction... involv[ing] 'merely material' atoms, then the fact that [we] have been able to formulate the idea of 'an improbable chemical reaction' and to trace [ourselves] back to it is remarkable indeed. That chemicals which are 'merely material' should come to understand their own nature is a staggering supposition."

It seems to me that this statement would have to make any atheist stop and think, "Yeah, how is this possible?" I know that I can't answer the question without conceding the likelihood of a creator. While I have no trouble questioning certain things about Mormonism, per se, or even certain things about Christianity in general, what I simply cannot do is seriously believe that there is not a Higher Power out there. I have honestly tried to convince myself that God may be a figment of my imagination, probably every bit as hard as you've tried to consider that He might be real.
While I agree that this is staggering and literally awesome, it doesn't so much as nudge me toward God as an explanation. I don't think that "God-of-the-gaps" arguments are reasonable in the first place, and I think the time to ask whether a particular mechanism might have been responsible for something is after the existence of the mechanism has been established.

I also don't see how it would be intellectually satisfying to just trade the question "how is life even possible?" for the question "how is God even possible?" It wouldn't have moved me any closer to actually explaining anything.

The origins of life are definitely something interesting that we should study more, and where we have lots of questions to answer, but for the time being, my response to the idea of God is the same as Laplace's ("I have no need for that hypothesis").

I can understand that. Can you understand why it wears me down to constantly be goaded to "prove" something that can't be proven?
I'm careful not to use the term "prove" myself. Proof is for math. But I think that for a belief to be reasonable, it should be justified, so I don't think it's out of place to ask for that justification. I think this is especially true with religious beliefs, because when it comes to religion, we're not usually dealing with a level of certainty like "I lean slightly towards this being true"; we're dealing with a level of certainty like "I'm so convinced that this is true that I'm going to devote my life to it."

I also think that there's an additional level of responsibility for justification that comes with evangelism. Anyone who goes up to another person and tells them that they should set aside their beliefs in favour of the belief system being evangelized to them ought to be able to answer the question "why should I?" Even if you weren't a missionary personally, considering the degree of evangelism that the LDS Church as a whole engages in, they ought to have justifications galore that you would have access to.

Well, that's probably not going to happen -- at least not in this life. However, let me give you a hypothetical situation. If you were to die, but were to discover that you were still a cognizant entity (just existing apart from the physical body you now have), with a greater capacity to understand the spiritual realm and the divine more than you do right now, would you take the opportunity to do so? I bet you would. Well, despite what the rest of Christianity may tell you, my belief is that's exactly what's going to happen. You may have to wait a few more years, but since I'm assuming you have no desire to die right away, maybe it would be a good thing for you to just not concern yourself with why you don't and can't believe right here and now.
Well, I think you know that I don't believe I can count on being able to investigate deep questions in any kind of afterlife, so I wouldn't find that approach to be satisfying.

... and in the meantime, I think we can both agree that in whatever earthly life I have left, what I believe will affect my actions, and the more correct my beliefs are, the better my chances of acting in good ways and not in bad ones.

Religious belief isn't just a sterile academic assertion; for most religious people, it's a core concern of their lives. If I treat it as something that doesn't warrant investigating in the here-and-now, I would see this as conceding that they're wrong at least about its importance, which would imply that they're wrong at a fundamental level overall.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
I'm really not sure how to approach this question, but I don't view it as hostile, since none of my past interactions with you have been hostile in the slightest. You know I'm inclined to be long-winded, and I really do try not to be. But when I manage to be brief, I usually leave out something that turns out to be important. So, I just ask you to be patient with me in my efforts to somehow be both concise and thorough.
I don't mind long posts in the slightest. I always appreciate that someone takes the time out of their day or cares enough about the topic to spend a half hour typing their thoughts out. So, never any worries there, I'll read every word. My responses, on the other hand, tend to be brief. I'll hope you'll put up with that characteristic of mine. I don't enjoy communicating via text.

Let me explain. Mormons believe that God created us for 100% unselfish purposes. His ultimate goal was that we come to find everlasting joy and have potential beyond our wildest dreams. That doesn't just happen. It's a lengthy and sometimes painful process. You know already that we believe that death does not mark the end, with regards to our progress and our opportunity to change and learn and grow. One LDS Apostle put it this way: "The more you understand about the gospel of Jesus Christ, the more you come to realize that endings here in mortality really aren't endings at all." I don't know if you're aware of our belief that, just as death is not the end, birth is not the beginning. We believe that God created us as spirit beings before we came to earth to receive mortal bodies. That is important to understand, because we also believe that we had a choice as to whether we wanted to come here or not. I realize that is so far out in left-field when it comes to traditional Christian doctrine, but it's what we believe was taught and understood by Christians anciently. We came here with an understanding that life was not going to be all that easy and that, in fact, for many of us, it would be one long, miserable experience. So why would we choose it, knowing what we did about what it might be like? We chose it because we understood that it was a necessary step in our eternal progress. We wanted to ultimately be like our Father in Heaven, and we trusted Him when He told us this was actually what He wanted for each of us. I point this out because, even though we may experience tremendous pain and suffering at the hands of depraved human beings, we knew that in the end, all wrongs would be righted and all losses made up to us. And then, we'd be able to start on the path of true eternal progression.

We believe that everyone who has ever been born or will ever be born chose to be born. That includes the murderers, the rapists and all of the other dregs of the earth. None of these people started out as monsters. They made choices that made them become monsters. They weren't born sinners, but were born pure and innocent. Sure, God knew that some of them would make horrendous choices, but they were His children, too, and they wanted to experience mortality. When God cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, He said, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." As "one of us"? Who would "us" be if not the Father and the Son? One of the attributes of godhood is a knowledge of both good and evil, and by eating the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve had taken the first step towards becoming like their Father in Heaven. Their Fall was, in reality, a "fortunate fall" or, as it is phrased in Latin, a "felix culpa."
I had no idea until reading those two paragraphs how much Mormon doctrine is similar to reincarnation. How fascinating! I'm kind of interested in reading more just for the sake of edification.

God placed them in a world where both good and evil existed. They would have to learn to discern between the two and make good choices, as each of us must do. If no one were permitted to make poor choices, how would any of us learn anything about evil? How is good even good if there is nothing with which to compare it? You ask why would God create someone who "rapes, murders and dismembers a child, all the while sitting back, watching and doing nothing about it." Have you asked yourself when, exactly, He should step in and stop this from happening? Should He prevent the evil before it happens? If so, how? By simply zapping the monster before he ever did anything monstrous? Or by zapping him immediately afterwards? If He were to miraculously keep the murderer from committing his crime, wouldn't people then be justified in saying, "What's up with God anyway? That man didn't do a thing, and God just struck him dead for no reason?" It's not as if the monster is ultimately going to get off Scot free. Justice will eventually be served.
So, let me make sure I understand something before we go further. Are you saying that before this murdered child was born she was with the Father in heaven and chose this awful path for her brief life here? If so, why? Do you really think we need to experience such extreme pain to learn some sort of lesson? If so, what's the lesson in allowing yourself to be raped, murdered and chopped up?

Another thought... Are you suggesting that God not allow men to commit any evil at all, or would you just somehow restrict it to "less evil"? Where would He draw the line? Would it be okay for a parent to verbally abuse his kid? Could he get away with slapping his kid across the face? How about beating him up? How about torturing him? How about killing him? I'm assuming that you'd say that one of these things crosses the line between acceptable and unacceptable. Are you absolutely sure where that line should be drawn? We see this life as a mere spec on a timeline of our existence that's going to never, ever end. The trials we experience in mortality will be like a single drop of water in the ocean when we've moved on to the next part of our existence. Our existence is about becoming perfect, not as starting out that way.

I am flat out just rambling at this point. I don't know if any of this is going to help you understand why I can worship this God. I could try to explain it in other ways, and I will if you still have questions and want me to try. Otherwise, I don't want to just go on talking for nothing.
Let's come back to this later. Obviously since I don't believe in any God at this point I'm going to say if there was a God, he/she/it should just create nice, sweet creatures. :) Why not?
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
To give the consumers a choice? For preference sake? I suppose many reasons.
Would you at least admit that if something is designed with a certain feature, that feature is expected to be used? Maybe not by all, but by at least some?

And did God really invent morals or did He just create creatures with the capability for inventing and comprehending the concept of morality?
Is this really a serious response or are you just wanting to keep talking in circles? You didn't answer my question earlier about where you find your definition of God?

And I'm sorry, I didn't mean to miss anything, what did you want to have a conversation about?
The OP.
 

Thana

Lady
Would you at least admit that if something is designed with a certain feature, that feature is expected to be used? Maybe not by all, but by at least some?

Is this really a serious response or are you just wanting to keep talking in circles? You didn't answer my question earlier about where you find your definition of God?

The OP.

Wasn't saying it was for choice and preference an admittance that yes, some are expected to use it?
And your question was 'Who designed us' not where I get my definition of God. But I suppose the answer to both is God. He designed us, yes, and I get my understanding of Him from Him.
But like I said, you're forgetting the Genesis story. Originally, He designed us perfectly.
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
Maybe it's irrational on my part, but I don't want to resign myself to the conclusion that the core beliefs of the majority of the planet are based on foolishness, lies, and unfounded assumptions.
This is true whether you're talking about theists our atheists. There is no empirical evidence either way. There is no superiority, no matter what you believe our disbelieve. Don't let your hubris convince you otherwise and respect isn't all that hard to give to others.
 

Thana

Lady
If God designed us perfectly, did he at some point redesign Adam and Eve and add the option of disobeying him?

Nope.
They had as much free will as us, only theirs was limited by their lack of knowledge. I'm sure people might think that would mean they didn't have free will, but I disagree.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
This is true whether you're talking about theists our atheists. There is no empirical evidence either way.
You do realize that this implies that religion is false, right? What you're saying is that whether or not any gods exist out there somewhere, we don't have any reason in the here-and-now to believe that they exist.

There is no superiority, no matter what you believe our disbelieve.
Well, no, because the non-existence of gods can be reconciled with a complete lack of evidence; this lack is problematic for the existence of gods. It's utterly incompatible with any sort of justified theism and works perfectly fine with living as if the question of the existence of gods doesn't matter.

Don't let your hubris convince you otherwise and respect isn't all that hard to give to others.
I'll continue to respect theists - along with everyone else - regardless of my opinion of their beliefs. The thing that's at issue is my respect for theism.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
But like I said, you're forgetting the Genesis story. Originally, He designed us perfectly.
A perfect design functions perfectly unless acted on by an outside influence or operated in unforeseen conditions.

What outside influence not under God's control or what unforeseen conditions arose to cause God's perfect design to behave imperfectly?
 
Top