Interesting take. It would seem like your are saying "either it's all God's fault or there is no God."
Yet, there are so many other viewpoints.
-
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!
God and Harvey
- Thread starter WalterTrull
- Start date
Yet, there are so many other viewpoints.
Of course Nature exists within God's presence and would disappear if he was not there. But he does not 'will' how it should behave - it is left to natural laws. So if global warming eventually makes life on earth impossible, he will let it happen and it will be the fault of humans.
It makes sense that nature will do that.
It makes no sense that a just, omnipotent god would allow a massive extinction of the innocent along with the guilty by sitting on [his] hands.
So I can't distinguish your statement from the observation that the world behaves exactly as if gods exist only in the imagination of individuals.
Being omnipotent may not carry responsibilities, but being benevolent, being just, being loving do.
Yet god neither says nor does (and certainly never cures amputees).
Nobody is exactly innocent and nobody is totally guilty. All have done good as well as bad deeds in this life as well as in previous lives.
Though loss of life seems very tragic to humans at this time, in divine terms it is just one step in a long series of lives. All those who died will be reborn pretty soon and the world at that time may actually be a better place to live.
God creates the world and watches it unfold, but he does not interfere with human actions and its results. If humans were wise they would heed warnings of climate change, not build house in low-lying areas, preserve wetlands so water drains easily etc.
It may look like he is sitting on his hands, but in times of catastrophe he does help those who ask sincerely and their karma allows them to be helped (actually his 'angels' perform this task, not him personally). Why doesn't he help everyone may be asked - but people have to pay their karma one way or another (there is no escape), so now may be better than later.
That would be true if the parameters are yours to dictate and we are nothing but puppets on a string. And there are stories of amputees being healed during the Asuza St revival.
Last edited:
Hmm. But were that correct, still, the end of the world would be the end of other lives.
What about justice? Justice is here and now, and justice indefinitely deferred isn't justice at all.
Or not, of course. When in doubt, take the cash in hand.
I strongly agree. But since on this hypothesis God created humans, [he] can't avoid liability for faulty products.
What end of world? That will not be any time soon. Justice is deferred, but not indefinitely - eventually every good act will be rewarded, every evil one punished. The time between the act and the result is getting shorter all the time.
Whether you believe it or not, the world is getting better - there was time when the plague killed 30-40 million people at a time - this is not happening any more. There will be no more holocausts. Life expectancy is the highest it has been.
As for God creating 'faulty' products - the whole purpose of creation is to make something 'perfect' starting with basically nothing (the singularity before the big bang). The path to perfection is filled with pain and suffering for the participants - that is just the way it is - but ultimately it will all be perfect - you may have to wait till your next life (or the one after) to witness that. In the meantime, we need to make sure by our actions that any suffering of other people is minimized.
Nope. As Magna Carta, and our legal systems, and I, all agree: justice delayed is justice denied.
I was fascinated by Pinkus' analysis to that effect. Can we be maturing as a species?
Well, the singularity before the BB was everything, not nothing ─ but let it pass.
I don't travel your path to this conclusion, but I agree with it.
This may be true in legal terms. But in real life if we have instant (or observably immediate) justice, than human freewill is lost. Everyone will be too afraid of the consequences to do anything evil, they will do good just for the reward.
But we are coming to a point in human history, that the time between the act and its moral result will become so short that justice will be seen to have been administered by God (although it is actually the law of karma that is doing it). Give it just a few more years for that to become obvious.
In the meantime, just observe what is happening to republicans in Congress - it is not all by chance.
Don't you have a concept of the human who tries to do the right thing for no better reason than that it's the right thing? To be a decent person because it's a more satisfying place to live than the alternatives?
What, one of those rare moments in human history where all the rascals get what they deserve? Hurry the day!
Of course lots of people will do the right thing just for the sake of it, but they need freewill so they can do it.
This moment has already been predicted by the Christ about the time of his return. People have misinterpreted it to mean the end of the world. There will be no end of the world, but the goats will all be separated and asked to leave. You can already see the separation taking place using the same criteria as the Christ predicted (Matthew 25 31-46) - those who don't care about sick people, care about hungry people or people in prison and who do not welcome strangers (immigrants) will be separated and asked to leave, when He returns - this will occur quite soon.
Just to be clear this does not mean the goats will die or be sent to hell. It just means they will be socially isolated and then not allowed by 'God' to be reborn on Earth (they will have to go to some less developed place until they learn to care about others)
Last edited:
If you mean freedom of choice, very few are completely lacking in freedom of choice.
Either (a) there are some 2000 year old folks living among us somewhere (Matthew 16:28, Matthew 24:32-34, Mark 9:1, Mark 13:29-30, Matthew 16:28, Matthew 24:32-34, Luke 9:27) or (b) he's running embarrassingly late or (c) he's changed his mind.
I thought the rescue of those on the lowest rung was Jesus' mission statement. Why switch to tough-guy mode when it really matters?
I can't think of a single period in human history when you couldn't make that case if you wanted to. Read Steven Pinker's book The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. It'll cheer you up enormously.
Again, I would have to disagree. Free will isn't a faulty product, it is a faulty decision. Man makes a faulty decision. One might as well say that "I know I shouldn't have lied, but it's my parents fault".
No, it's not the power to decide, it's the power to decide on faulty grounds that's the design error.
I guess we have different glasses.
Different designers?
Possible... one can be a monkey's uncle and the other designed by God
Firestorm77
Member
A life without suffering, would be a pointless existence. The entire concept of human beings hinges on the principle of our conscious ability to feel happy and, as a result, feel sad.
No, no, the glasses ...Possible... one can be a monkey's uncle and the other designed by God