Questions that believers cannot answer

[PearlSeeker]

Ah, so when you say that we would have no free will, you didn't actually mean it. You simply meant that we wouldn't have the opportunity to choose evil because evil would not exist.
A bit like having no culinary free will if chicken didn't exist?

Without evil existing, I can choose to give to charity or not. To volunteer for charities or not.
If I chose to do either, I would have the freedom to choose which, and by how much.

Note: (This is important) If something has never existed, then not being able to choose it does not impinge on free will. Free will only affects what does exist. In fact, the very idea of not being able to choose something that has never existed is fundamentally incoherent!
Does the fact that an ethical concept has never existed (let's call it evod) mean that we don't have free will now? Obviously not. QED.

If moral evil never existed you could still choose between eating potato or pasta but you would be a puppet morally.

Example: You want to go home on a train that runs only once every hour. The train is about to leave and you are just boarding as a man with crutches near you falls on the platform. If you help him up, you will miss the train. What do you do?

Source: Decision-making in everyday moral conflict situations: Development and validation of a new measure

 

[KWED]

That is absolutely false.

But you consider Bahaullah infallible and accept everything he says, but you don't really seem to like god and don't agree with everything he does.

 

[KWED]

If moral evil never existed you could still choose between eating potato or pasta but you would be a puppet morally.

There you go again, just repeating your initial claim without explanation.

Example: You want to go home on a train that runs only once every hour. The train is about to leave and you are just boarding as a man with crutches near you falls on the platform. If you help him up, you will miss the train. What do you do?

Depends.
How does that support your argument?

 

[PearlSeeker]

Depends.
How does that support your argument?

If you don't have freedom to choose moral evil you would have no option in such situations. You would always automatically act altruistic. It would be like an order to a robot.

 

[KWED]

If you don't have freedom to choose moral evil you would have no option in such situations.

Hmm. You seem confused.
In any given situation there is not only two options; one good and one evil.

You would always automatically act altruistic.

There would still be the ability to choose how altruistically to act, which of many possible options to take, or even whether to act at all.

You didn't explain how your train station example supports your point. You didn't even ask me to clarify my response, which suggests you didn't really understand it in the first place.

It would be like an order to a robot.

No it wouldn't.
Example:
You see an empty house on fire down the road. Do you run down there immediately with no plan in mind? Do you call the emergency services? Do you round up your neighbours and see who has a fire extinguisher/hose/buckets? Do you do nothing as someone else will have already done something about it?
None of those require the existence of evil, yet you still have free will to determine your course of action. You are not a robot following a single, inevitable plan.

Also, were Adam and Eve robots being controlled like puppets before evil entered the garden?

 

[KWED]

God did not create cancer, he created a world where people and animals can get cancer when the conditions are such that the immune system fails or people inherit the gene for cancer.

So where did infancy cancer come from? And why didn't god know about it? And if he did, why didn't he avoid it?
When god created the universe he created it with cancer as an inherent part, knowing that there would be infants who develop it and dies in agony. He could have created a universe without cancers that develop in infants. He chose not to. Therefore it is something he wants to happen. He is responsible.

If a manufacturer knowingly produces a product that will result in children being killed from it being used as designed, they would be prosecuted for corporate manslaughter. So why do you want to let god off the hook so easily?

It makes no sense that God is now going to [prevent cancer since He was the One who created the conditions for cancer to exist...Capish?

Obviously, because he wants a world where children die in agony from cancer. He made the choice to create cancers that develop in children for no apparent reason, when he equally had the option of creating a world where it did not happen.
The point is - what kind of a monster would do that in the first place?

I don't buy that punishment argument, that's Christian.

Good. But it still leaves you needing to explain why god deliberately creates so much unnecessary suffering.

There is no purpose for that, not for the infants. They are just collateral damage, a way to make the parents suffer.

**** me! This just gets worse.
So god wants to make the parents suffer, and the way he decides to do it is to have their child die in agony from cancer.
Your god really is a raving psychopath!

No, it is not even related to religious belief. The fact is that the world is a storehouse of suffering even if there is no God.

Of course the source and purpose of suffering is a religious issue.
Without god there is no source or purpose of suffering (other than natural processes). The issue does not exist.

What God could have done is a moot point because God did not do it

No. The whole point of this is to examine why god made the universe the way he did.
You agree that the universe is a pretty ****ty place for many people. So what was god up to? If he doesn't want people to suffer so much, why does he make people suffer so much?

God could have created the world differently such that there was no suffering, but since God did not do that it is necessary for us to endure the suffering.

But it was not necessary for god to create a universe where it is necessary for you to suffer so much.

I accept it because it is reality, regardless of any religious beliefs.

Just because something happens doesn't mean you have to accept it. It is the very basis for protest and change. Have you not read any history?

The suffering in this world is not evenly distributed so some people suffer much more than others. No, it is not fair but think about how it could be different. Everyone's life circumstances cannot be the same so some people are just lucky and others aren't.

So you don't think god has anything to do with who suffers of by how much. It is just random chance/environment?

That'd be true even if there was no God.

According to your argument, the world works as if there is no god.

How do you know it is not the case in real life?

Because those experience great suffering have pretty imperfect lives, by definition.

I think I do, given I have a MA degree in psychology.

Really?
Then why do you struggle to understand basic concepts and definitions?

God is not a person. To compare God with a person and expect the same behavior that would be expected of a person is the fallacy of false equivalence.

That is not false equivalence. I am not claiming that men and god are the same because they share a common trait. I am saying that the word "benevolence" has meaning. If god's attributes do not correspond to the meaning of benevolence, you cannot call him "benevolent".

It would be like ordering a burger and getting soup because the restaurant defines "burger" differently. It is nonsensical.

I was not talking about whether people's beliefs are shaped by their life experiences, of course they are. I was talking about asking people if suffering made them grow stronger or not.

I said:
"We can get some answers as to whether suffering helped people grow stronger if we talk to people who have suffered a lot and look at their lives, and these people could be atheists or believers."

We can't really draw any valid inferences from such questioning because of things like a lack of control group, confirmation bias, imprecise definitions.
Thought you'd done an MA in psychology? Surely you covered this kind of thing.

 

[Sheldon]

It's like calling the Holocaust a unfortunate but necessary population control event. Anything to deny reality.

You might want to consider not using the holocaust for cheap point scoring. Whilst I realise abortion arguments can bring out the worst in people, that is appalling.

 

[Truth in love]

I am kind of confused. Can you explain what you mean by that?
Do you believe in the Trinity, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and they are all part of God?

Where do you believe we lived as spirits before birth? I do not believe that the souls (spirits) of ordinary humans existed before conception in the mother's womb. I believe that only the souls of the Prophets were preexistent in the spiritual world before they were sent to this world to unite with their bodies.

So you believe that our physical body will rise from the grave, and the where do you think it will progress to?

What I believe will happen to our physical body and our spirit (soul) is explained in the quote below. It was written by a Christian but is congruent with Baha'i beliefs.

The Resuscitation of Man from the Dead and His Entrance into Eternal Life

421. When the body is no longer able to perform the bodily functions in the natural world that correspond to the spirit’s thoughts and affections, which the spirit has from the spiritual world, man is said to die. This takes place when the respiration of the lungs and the beatings of the heart cease. But the man does not die; he is merely separated from the bodily part that was of use to him in the world, while the man himself continues to live. It is said that the man himself continues to live since man is not a man because of his body but because of his spirit, for it is the spirit that thinks in man, and thought with affection is what constitutes man. Evidently, then, the death of man is merely his passing from one world into another. And this is why in the Word in its internal sense “death” signifies resurrection and continuation of life. Heaven and Hell, p. 351

1. We often refer to the Godhead. It's similar to the trinity, however God the Father and Jesus are separate persons each with a physical body.

2. Yes I believe in resurrection. There is a common notion that the body is bad or wrong and needs to be done away with. I would hold that the mortal body has issues, but that those limits are corrected with resurrection. In Luke 24 Jesus is risen from the dead, can pass through walls and can also be touched and eat. Sort of the best of broth worlds.

3. As for the pre earth life, great question, not sure how much detail I can provide.

A summary from the gospel library states “Throughout our premortal life, we developed our identity and increased our spiritual capabilities. Blessed with the gift of agency, we made important decisions, such as the decision to follow Heavenly Father’s plan. These decisions affected our life then and now. We grew in intelligence and learned to love the truth, and we prepared to come to the earth, where we could continue to progress.”

Also

“God is not only our Ruler and Creator; He is also our Heavenly Father. All men and women are literally the sons and daughters of God. “Man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father, prior to coming upon the earth in a temporal [physical] body” (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph F. Smith [1998], 335).”


There are a lot of small hints about this scattered in the Bible, but few details. Isaiah tells us about Satan being cast down, The book of Revelation tells us of a war in heaven, but again details are sparse.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You might want to consider not using the holocaust for cheap point scoring. Whilst I realise abortion arguments can bring out the worst in people, that is appalling.

What's appalling about comparing two different forms of human slaughter? Both deprive us of people who could have contributed to society.
Both happen because of a dehumanizing ideology.

 

[CG Didymus]

So where did infancy cancer come from? And why didn't god know about it? And if he did, why didn't he avoid it?
When god created the universe he created it with cancer as an inherent part, knowing that there would be infants who develop it and dies in agony. He could have created a universe without cancers that develop in infants. He chose not to. Therefore it is something he wants to happen. He is responsible.

If a manufacturer knowingly produces a product that will result in children being killed from it being used as designed, they would be prosecuted for corporate manslaughter. So why do you want to let god off the hook so easily?

Obviously, because he wants a world where children die in agony from cancer. He made the choice to create cancers that develop in children for no apparent reason, when he equally had the option of creating a world where it did not happen.
The point is - what kind of a monster would do that in the first place?

Good. But it still leaves you needing to explain why god deliberately creates so much unnecessary suffering.

**** me! This just gets worse.
So god wants to make the parents suffer, and the way he decides to do it is to have their child die in agony from cancer.
Your god really is a raving psychopath!

Of course the source and purpose of suffering is a religious issue.
Without god there is no source or purpose of suffering (other than natural processes). The issue does not exist.

No. The whole point of this is to examine why god made the universe the way he did.
You agree that the universe is a pretty ****ty place for many people. So what was god up to? If he doesn't want people to suffer so much, why does he make people suffer so much?

But it was not necessary for god to create a universe where it is necessary for you to suffer so much.

Just because something happens doesn't mean you have to accept it. It is the very basis for protest and change. Have you not read any history?

So you don't think god has anything to do with who suffers of by how much. It is just random chance/environment?

According to your argument, the world works as if there is no god.

Because those experience great suffering have pretty imperfect lives, by definition...

" According to your argument, the world works as if there is no god." Especially the Baha'i definition of God. At least Christians invented Satan, so that the blame for suffering and evil fall on him. And any dualistic concept of God has a way to explain good and evil. Which is what the world looks like... a battle between what is thought of as being good versus what we think of as evil. But in nature does a hurricane or an earthquake care if people get killed or hurt? Those things happen when they happen. But if there is an all-knowing creator God, then he's the one to blame for making nature the way it is.

But then Baha'is have God's other worlds... spiritual worlds. If they don't expect any suffering and death there, then there is a place that God created where there is no need for suffering and death. Or... it's all make believe and the world works the way it does because there is no God like the one the Baha'is believe in. What's wrong with just invisible forces that push and pull and create and destroy and that some people call God? And then try to justify and explain why the bad stuff happens?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

And therefore? Why would Jesus need to die to balance anything?
Is God omnipotent or is it not? If it is, why would Jesus need to die?...................

God is Law Giver. God does Not go back on His Law.
Disobedient Adam broke God's Law of Genesis 2:17.
Because of what Adam did is why we don't have the original human perfection Adam had before he broke the Law.
We, being imperfect as Adam became after breaking the Law, we can't undo what Adam did and passed down to us.
Thus we needed someone who could undo the damage Adam brought upon us.
Equal justice is: life for life.
Our life can't equal an original sinless Adam, but Jesus being born without sin would be an equal.
Adam proved unfaithful to God under righteous conditions.
Jesus proved faithful to God even under adverse conditions to the point of dying a faithful death.
Thus, faithful-sinless Jesus balanced the Scales of Justice for us opening up the way for a resurrection for us.
As we know we can't resurrect oneself or another so we needed someone who could resurrect us.
Faithful Jesus can and will - Revelation 1:18

 

[URAVIP2ME]

.......How many manufacturers give you a new contract on the condition their son dies?

How many clergy have used the pulpit, as a contract for the political, as a recruiting station so parents would sacrifice their sons on the Altar of War as if that is the same as the Altar of God on the condition that their son dies he gets a free pass (contract) to heaven ___________

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Why did god make them deformed in the first place?

In the first place, Adam and Eve were created with healthy human perfection with the opportunity to live forever in perfect health right here on Earth.
Adam's sin introduced sin which leads to sickness and death into our world.
So, the blame rests on: sinners Satan and Adam.
God sent Jesus to undo all the damage Satan and Adam brought upon us.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I have had several occasions where I have had refunds or warranty work done even though I wasn't technically covered. The supplier made an exception. It happens all the time.

Seems as if the warranty was not upheld for various reasons.
However, a warranty is Not the Law of God.
God would have to break His own Law thus showing His Law did Not really be the Law.
There would be No reason for God to have His Law just to break it.
God's Word would have had little meaning if it could be broken.
Since God, who can not lie (Titus 1:2) then it was the truth that if you broke the Law you would die.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

[QUOTE="KWED, post: 7774626, member: 73255].........If god doesn't like what satan does, why doesn't he stop him? Either god can't stop satan, or he doesn't want to stop satan.[/QUOTE]

Any Big Bully can stop someone lesser. God is Not a Bully forcing anyone against one's will.
Satan challenged God, and if God did Not accept that challenge it could be said Satan is right.
The passing of time would settle the Issue of Sovereignty, who governs best: Satan or God.
Adam chose Satan as the one to govern best.
Adam set up People Rule as superior to God Rule by listening to Satan.
Now, mankind's long history has proven that MAN (Not God) has dominated MAN to MAN's hurt, MAN's injury.
Plus, the passing of time has allowed for us to be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

.....Here is the drill. God created a world in which humans have to suffer and then we have to pray to God to help us with the suffering that he ensured we would have to endure... Any believer who cannot see what is wrong with that needs a course in logic!

The 'god' of this world of badness -> aka Satan brought suffering into our world.- 2 Corinthians 4:4
God's purpose is that Earth be populated under righteous conditions - Gen. 1:28
Since we are all born ' after ' Satan and Adam rebelled against God is why there is suffering.
> Satan's logic is: touch our ' flesh....' (loose physical health) and we would Not serve God under bad conditions.
Both Job and Jesus under suffering conditions proved Satan to be the liar that Satan is.
Jesus to come and undo all the suffering Satan and Adam brought upon humanity.
Jesus will also destroy Satan - Hebrews 2:14 B

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Whose fault is it when a child is born with a congenital condition that means they will dies in great suffering, god or man?

God made everything 'very good'. Adam and Eve had a perfectly good healthy start with the opportunity to live forever on a beautiful paradisical Earth as Eden was a sample.

Adam's sin introduced sin with its effects of sickness and death.
If God would have gotten rid of sinners Adam and Eve we would Not be here.
The passing of time has allowed us the time to be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us.
Under Satan and Adam what we see is world-wide suffering caused by them.
It is God's will, His purpose to send Jesus to bring 'healing' to earth's nations - Revelation 22:2.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

........Before we existed, how could god love us?
And if he loved us, why did he crate us in such a way that necessitates so much suffering? That is not rational behaviour. So we agree that there is no point and no need for the universe or humanity to exist.
So all the suffering is not just completely meaningless, it is deliberately sadistic.

God "IS" love, God 'has' wisdom, God 'has' mercy, God 'has' justice, but only God "IS" love.
God had a heavenly family and expanded His creation business to include the earthly (visible) realm of existence.
God's purpose is that we exist and exist forever, Not in suffering but in 'perfect health' as in Isaiah 35th chapter.
Satan challenged God if we suffer we would Not serve God under adverse conditions - Job 2:4-5.
So, until Jesus comes to bring 'healing ' to earth's nations there will be suffering - Revelation 22:2

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The word "benevolent" has a meaning.
If a person deliberately causes pain and suffering, or if they do not prevent pain and suffering if they are able to, then they are not benevolent, by definition............ Why not? I would if I were god. Wouldn't you?

In the Bible it is Satan and Adam causing the suffering - Job 2:4-5
Once the 'Issue of Sovereignty' is settled then pain and suffering will be No more caused by Satan and Adam.
If Adam and Eve would Not have been allowed to have children we simply would Not be here.
The passing of time has allowed for us to be born that otherwise we would Not exist.
Through God's benevolence it is Jesus who will undo mankind's suffering, so suffering is temporary.
Temporary because of the trouble Satan and Adam caused us, Not God.

 

[Trailblazer]

The 'god' of this world of badness -> aka Satan brought suffering into our world.- 2 Corinthians 4:4
God's purpose is that Earth be populated under righteous conditions - Gen. 1:28
Since we are all born ' after ' Satan and Adam rebelled against God is why there is suffering.
> Satan's logic is: touch our ' flesh....' (loose physical health) and we would Not serve God under bad conditions.
Both Job and Jesus under suffering conditions proved Satan to be the liar that Satan is.
Jesus to come and undo all the suffering Satan and Adam brought upon humanity.
Jesus will also destroy Satan - Hebrews 2:14 B

Baha'is do not believe that there is an entity called Satan. We believe that Satan as refereed to in the Bible is an allegory for the lower material nature of man, the evil ego within man.

“The reality underlying this question is that the evil spirit, Satan or whatever is interpreted as evil, refers to the lower nature in man. This baser nature is symbolized in various ways. In man there are two expressions, one is the expression of nature, the other the expression of the spiritual realm…. God has never created an evil spirit; all such ideas and nomenclature are symbols expressing the mere human or earthly nature of man. It is an essential condition of the soil of earth that thorns, weeds and fruitless trees may grow from it. Relatively speaking, this is evil; it is simply the lower state and baser product of nature.“
Abdu’l-Baha, Promulgation of Universal Peace, pp. 294–295.

“God has created all in His image and likeness. Shall we manifest hatred for His creatures and servants? This would be contrary to the will of God and according to the will of Satan, by which we mean the natural inclinations of the lower nature. This lower nature in man is symbolized as Satan—the evil ego within us, not an evil personality outside.”
The Promulgation of Universal Peace, pp. 286-287