• 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!

Why Would Christians Worship a God Who Clearly Wouldn't Lift A Finger For Them?

Glaurung

Denizen of Niflheim
Please, you tell me what good comes from children who are being sold into sexual slavery by the hundreds of thousands and abused repeatedly. Go on, tell me.
Now you've changed the subject. But the answer is the same. In terms of human perpetuated evil the greater good lies in our God given moral agency (and that is a good thing). Unfortunately, the flip side of that agency is that some people will abuse that agency to do bad, even terrible things to others. It is not that there's any good to come from sexual slavery or the abuse of children. Rather it is that the freedom to do such evil is a good insofar as we also have the agency to do virtuous, even heroic things.

The ultimate good will be the justice God will mete out at the final judgment. He will also reward those who used their freedom to do good. God allows evil. But that does not mean that he won't redress it in the end. It does not mean he will neglect to punish it. (Ultimately).

But until history closes its final chapter evil will be an inescapable reality of this world. It is up to us to do good in the meantime. Indeed to do good I believe is our primary mission in this life.
 
Last edited:

ppp

Well-Known Member
God allows evil. But that does not mean that he won't redress it in the end. It does not mean he will neglect to punish it. (Ultimately).
What you are describing someone with the ability to stop a rape, but instead closing the door and walking away, making a note to punish the rapist later. The actions that you are describing are evil.
 

Glaurung

Denizen of Niflheim
What you are describing someone with the ability to stop a rape, but instead closing the door and walking away, making a note to punish the rapist later. The actions that you are describing are evil.
If God were to intervene every time someone intended to do an evil to someone else then the moral freedom this life hinges upon would be neutered. Matthew 13:24-20
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
If God were to intervene every time someone intended to do an evil to someone else then the moral freedom this life hinges upon would be neutered. Matthew 13:24-20
I don't see that stopping a rape or all the rapes or designing a world where there are no rapes would impede my moral freedom. Are you able to demonstrate that to be true and salient? Or are you just quoting and depending on the Bible's repute to keep me from examining that claim too closely?
 

Glaurung

Denizen of Niflheim
I don't see that stopping a rape or all the rapes or designing a world where there are no rapes would impede my moral freedom. Are you able to demonstrate that to be true and salient? Or are you just quoting and depending on the Bible's repute to keep me from examining that claim too closely?
God could have created a world wherein human beings would lack any kind sexual faculty whatsoever, thereby creating a world with moral agency but without any sexual crime. We could bud like mushrooms I guess. But that's not the world he created. Human beings are a sexual species with moral agency. That means some will use that sexual faculty to bad, even terrible ends.

If our moral freedom is to be meaningful it necessarily means accepting a world wherein people can hurt other people. You could insist that we'd still have meaningful moral agency even without any ability to do evil. But I don't see it. Virtue is meritorious because it must be chosen. There would be no merit in it if virtue were given to you by default.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
God could have created a world wherein human beings would lack any kind sexual faculty whatsoever, thereby creating a world with moral agency but without any sexual crime. We could bud like mushrooms I guess. But that's not the world he created. Human beings are a sexual species with moral agency. That means some will use that sexual faculty to bad, even terrible ends.

If our moral freedom is to be meaningful it necessarily means accepting a world wherein people can hurt other people. You could insist that we'd still have meaningful moral agency even without any ability to do evil. But I don't see it. Virtue is meritorious because it must be chosen. There would be no merit in it if virtue were given to you by default.
I am not talking about mushrooms. I am talking about not closing the door and walking away. I think that you would agree that if I had the ability to stop a rape with no danger to myself, and instead chose to walk away, that I would be a moral monster. And that I would still be a moral monster even if I argued that I valued the rapists moral freedom over the right of his victim to not be sexually assaulted.

Actually, let me ask. Do you think that if I walked away and argued that I valued the rapists moral freedom over the right of his victim to not be sexually assaulted would I be acting morally?
 

Glaurung

Denizen of Niflheim
I am not talking about mushrooms. I am talking about not closing the door and walking away. I think that you would agree that if I had the ability to stop a rape with no danger to myself, and instead chose to walk away, that I would be a moral monster. And that I would still be a moral monster even if I argued that I valued the rapists moral freedom over the right of his victim to not be sexually assaulted.
An asexual world would be one where rape would not occur, would it not?

Anyway, it is your obligation to do good and to prevent evil. Insofar as you can. It is God's job to govern the universe and to bring it to the ultimate end for which it was created. To bring about this end God in his consequent will permits us to do evil. It is necessary that he permit it otherwise he would do injustice to his own providential design. Which we admittedly have to take on trust will turn out (in the end) to be for our ultimate benefit. Thus it is not applicable to God to claim that he is unjust because he does not immediately prevent every and all evils perpetuated by human actions. He has to allow it. But that does not mean he will not address it when the the good he seeks for our sake comes to its fruition.

The difference is that God is not a moral creature bound in time. We are those creatures bound to moral action in time. God is the good to be realized by moral creatures after they have acted in time.

Actually, let me ask. Do you think that if I walked away and argued that I valued the rapists moral freedom over the right of his victim to not be sexually assaulted would I be acting morally?
No, but what is applicable to us as moral agents in time is not applicable to the good itself outside of all time. God governs in the view of eternity. We act in the limitations of time. God and the creature cannot be compared. The chasm between the two is infinite.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Thus it is not applicable to God to claim that he is unjust because he does not immediately prevent every and all evils perpetuated by human actions. He has to allow it. But that does not mean he will not address it when the the good he seeks for our sake comes to its fruition.
I agree that God has to allow evil because we have free will, so people have to be free to choose good or evil, and that means there will be evil in the world as long as there are evil people. There is no alternative because if God stepped in every time someone was about to do evil that would upset the whole order of Creation. The whole purpose of life is to learn and grow from our choices, so we have to have choices. Unfortunately, there is collateral damage to good people when evil people commit evil acts.
The difference is that God is not a moral creature bound in time. We are those creatures bound to moral action in time. God is the good to be realized by moral creatures after they have acted in time.

No, but what is applicable to us as moral agents in time is not applicable to the good itself outside of all time. God governs in the view of eternity. We act in the limitations of time. God and the creature cannot be compared. The chasm between the two is infinite.
But now I have a problem, when you say that God is the good. How do you know that? There is no way you can know that, and as such it is just a belief, a belief based solely upon your religious scriptures. I have a serious problem with a good God that allows so much suffering in the world, NOT the suffering owing to free will choices, the other suffering that humans and animals have to to endure because God set it up that way by creating a material world in which suffering is unavoidable.

“Some things are subject to the free will of man, such as justice, equity, tyranny and injustice, in other words, good and evil actions; it is evident and clear that these actions are, for the most part, left to the will of man. But there are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them. But in the choice of good and bad actions he is free, and he commits them according to his own will.” Some Answered Questions, p. 248

For me, the religious apologetic that we grow stronger, that we become more spiritual as a result of suffering, does not cut it, because many people do not grow, but rather they are broken. Then we have another serious problem, the unequal distribution of 'undue' suffering; why does a just and loving God allow that? To blame the people who suffer because they could not endure that suffering and call them weak or unholy souls is nothing short of cruel, judgmental, and lacking in compassion.

I go against my own religious teachings when I say that I question God's goodness, but otherwise I have to go against logic and reason, and I cannot do that. It makes no sense that a 'good God' would allow so much suffering which is so unequally distributed. When I say 'allow' I mean have suffering be the fate of certain people and not others.
 
Last edited:

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Prayer is a good thing if it comforts a person and calms them down when they are going through a trial. I'd call something like prayer a good therapy. The person praying can even believe God is listening to them if it makes them feel better. All that doesn't change the fact that from all outward indications all they're doing is having a conversation with themselves. They may hear voices in their mind talking to them and think it's the Holy Spirit, but still there's no way to distinguish whether God is really talking to them or they're delusional. But the bottom line is that nothing measurable results from their prayers. No jobs are found when requested, no family members are healed of disease; they die anyway, no food is put on the table as a result of prayer, no homeless person suddenly is offered a free house out of the blue, no woman is saved from rape and murder when she screams, "God, please save me!". Any good result that occurs by happenstance is always explainable by natural means. In other words, NOTHING miraculous happens as a result of prayer.
Well, you said it, I didn’t. Prayer is an inward activity and so doesn’t necessarily have outward results. And inner miracles do happen — sometimes outward, too. I’ve witnessed them.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
An asexual world would be one where rape would not occur, would it not?
We're using rape as an example of immoral behavior.

Anyway, it is your obligation to do good and to prevent evil. Insofar as you can. It is God's job to govern the universe and to bring it to the ultimate end for which it was created. To bring about this end God in his consequent will permits us to do evil. It is necessary that he permit it otherwise he would do injustice to his own providential design. Which we admittedly have to take on trust will turn out (in the end) to be for our ultimate benefit. Thus it is not applicable to God to claim that he is unjust because he does not immediately prevent every and all evils perpetuated by human actions. He has to allow it. But that does not mean he will not address it when the the good he seeks for our sake comes to its fruition.

The difference is that God is not a moral creature bound in time. We are those creatures bound to moral action in time. God is the good to be realized by moral creatures after they have acted in time.
No, but what is applicable to us as moral agents in time is not applicable to the good itself outside of all time. God governs in the view of eternity. We act in the limitations of time. God and the creature cannot be compared. The chasm between the two is infinite.

Your first paragraph is basically saying that God does not have to act morally because he has other things to do. A "job" to do.
Followed by two paragraphs simply asserting that God is good.
The problem is that you have yet to demonstrate that God is moral in any practical sense. And for morality, it is only the practical acts that matter.

Why should I consider any being to be good who does not meet my minimal standard for moral behavior? Why should I consider any being to be good who would close the door and walk away?
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Well, you said it, I didn’t. Prayer is an inward activity and so doesn’t necessarily have outward results. And inner miracles do happen — sometimes outward, too. I’ve witnessed them.
Please if it's not too much to ask, can you tell me (or us) the details of the most miraculous miracle you ever witnessed?
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Now you've changed the subject. But the answer is the same. In terms of human perpetuated evil the greater good lies in our God given moral agency (and that is a good thing). Unfortunately, the flip side of that agency is that some people will abuse that agency to do bad, even terrible things to others. It is not that there's any good to come from sexual slavery or the abuse of children. Rather it is that the freedom to do such evil is a good insofar as we also have the agency to do virtuous, even heroic things.

The ultimate good will be the justice God will mete out at the final judgment. He will also reward those who used their freedom to do good. God allows evil. But that does not mean that he won't redress it in the end. It does not mean he will neglect to punish it. (Ultimately).

But until history closes its final chapter evil will be an inescapable reality of this world. It is up to us to do good in the meantime. Indeed to do good I believe is our primary mission in this life.

Red above: well that's just fine and dandy for the kids. They won't be helped when they need it here on earth even though God is perfectly capable of helping them. But PRAISE GOD there will be a time in the afterlife when these evil men will get their just desserts!!! Oh brother! I've heard some feeble excuse-making for God but that one takes the cake. in fact, it takes the entire bakery. That's cold comfort for the kids who are abused thousands of times in the most horrible ways. I'm sure they'd be comforted by your words. :(o_O God: "Don't worry, kid. I'm not going to stop this from happening to you now. But after you're dead I'm going to punish this bad man really good!"
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I promise. I never make fun. I might offer my restrained opinion but if that's okay please tell us.
First, I witnessed the healing of a burn. My father was standing in a field talking with a farmer, who was on his tractor. Without thinking, my father put his hand on the hot muffler of the stack to lean on it. 2nd degree burns — hand red and blistered. The farmer took my father’s hand, spoke in tongues, and the hand was instantly like new. I saw it.

Second, I was in the hospital, recovering from orthopedic surgery. I hadn’t had any medication for a long while, and my leg was in severe pain. Mom placed her hands on my leg and I could feel the pain wash out.

Third, my wife suffers from chronic migraine. Once she had one so severe that she was puking. No meds on hand. I called Mom. She came over, did the same thing to my wife. Headache gone.

Mom calls it healing prayer. The farmer merely called it “the touch.”
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
First, I witnessed the healing of a burn. My father was standing in a field talking with a farmer, who was on his tractor. Without thinking, my father put his hand on the hot muffler of the stack to lean on it. 2nd degree burns — hand red and blistered. The farmer took my father’s hand, spoke in tongues, and the hand was instantly like new. I saw it.

Second, I was in the hospital, recovering from orthopedic surgery. I hadn’t had any medication for a long while, and my leg was in severe pain. Mom placed her hands on my leg and I could feel the pain wash out.

Third, my wife suffers from chronic migraine. Once she had one so severe that she was puking. No meds on hand. I called Mom. She came over, did the same thing to my wife. Headache gone.

Mom calls it healing prayer. The farmer merely called it “the touch.”
We should form a line of burns victims to receive "the touch" from your mother if she is still here with us.

Scrap that, if she can do it repeatedly give her a job in the hospital
 
Top