In that situation, the driving instructor has a duty to step in and take control of the car if the student is driving dangerously.
Someone who has decided not to take control in any circumstance is called a passenger, not a driving instructor.
-
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 is in control, what does that mean?
- Thread starter Trailblazer
- Start date
Someone who has decided not to take control in any circumstance is called a passenger, not a driving instructor.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Do you have a point to make?
Just that control and responsibility are linked.
If someone is in control, then they're responsible for the outcome. If they're not responsible, then this implies they weren't in control.
Yes, God has no hands but ours (Daddy's)
I see this - and other takes on the problem of evil/suffering - as specific cases of a larger question:
Why does God behave in a way that's consistent with God not existing at all?
I can think of one obvious answer to that question.
If our hands are "God's hands," then in that scenario, aren't the rapist's hands just as much "God's hands" as the Dad's?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
This only applies to humans. God is not a human therefore does not apply to God.
God has control but God has no responsibility to humans, so whatever we get from God is only by God's Grace.
Nonsense.
I didn't talk about responsibility to humans; I talked about responsibility, period.
The person in control is the one who guides it to the outcome... IOW the one responsible for what happens.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
The bigger question is why some atheists think that God is responsible for eliminating evil/suffering.
In your opinion God does not exist because God does not DO what you think He should DO.
That's highly illogical because an omnipotent God only does what He chooses to do.
It is also illogical because God gave man free will so man could eliminate his own evil/suffering.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
It it is a person, but God is not a person.
Explain how you think this is relevant.
If you think that's been my argument, then you haven't understood anything I've said.
And apparently, "what God chooses to do" is act like he doesn't exist.
Not again with this nonsense. Please.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
One has to ask what it means to say that God is in control.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
It is only relevant if you are trying to make God into a person and put the same requirements on God as a person has.
There's that sticky issue of free will. And one could of course argue what about the free will of the victim, other than God will heal and the promise of restoration.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Okay, let's start over. What would you expect God to act like if He did exist?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
"But why is life so unfair if God is loving and just?" Free will does not answer that question.
We know all about God's promises, but meanwhile many people suffer through no fault or free will decisions of their own. That setup is not fair and it does not appear that God is loving.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Agreed.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Tell that to the atheists.
That would suggest God willed the evil. It depends on whether one believes that God directly intervenes with humanity or through a mediator. I don't believe the rapist was in any way doing God's will, only his own.