Why doesn't God save starving children

[Unification]

Because he doesn't exist.

Correct. "God" is not a "he."

 

[Mycroft]

Correct. "God" is not a "he."

Let me be more specific: There is no god. Of any kind.

 

[viole]

It doesn't work for you, but it works for us. We see God differently than you do, we

Now we're raising the bar, so to speak. There are starving people because other people won't feed them. Diseases and natural disasters are a whole different thing.

They are a different thing since we have CNN. I am sure there have been famines in the past that exterminated children (expendable, if they cannot go hunting) without nobody knowing it. So, historically, they are very close to natual disasters.

If we consider everything, I think we have good reasons to deduce that God, if He exists, does not care about childrens lives. Unless, of course, He likes to have them with Himself in Heaven, which, alas, would beg the reverse question: why does He let children grow up and risk damnation? Should we envy those children that died so young and so horribly?

What you ask is an age-old question, and I asked it myself when I was a teenager before I became a believer. I have a lot of explanations, but no real answers.

I bet, I have a much simpler explanation... And an answer, as a bonus .

Personally, my faith keeps me strong. I've seen people in the midst of suffering give glory to God; suffering from diseases and natural disasters, and people who have lost loved ones, they still give glory to God.
I know that what I wrote is a non-answer to you, but if I go any further, it will become a sermon.

Yes, but I can prove to you that most of them, if not all, deluded themselves. That does not imply that believing in a glorious God that works in mysterious ways does not provide comfort against such losses, but I am not interested in psychology but in the metaphysical claim.

For instance, do you think it made a difference, apart from her natural quest for explanations, for a young Roman woman, who just lost her kid, to give glory to Jupiter or Apollo?

Ciao

- viole

 

[ChristineES]

They are a different thing since we have CNN. I am sure there have been famines in the past that exterminated children (expendable, if they cannot go hunting) without nobody knowing it. So, historically, they are very close to natual disasters.

If we consider everything, I think we have good reasons to deduce that God, if He exists, does not care about childrens lives. Unless, of course, He likes to have them with Himself in Heaven, which, alas, would beg the reverse question: why does He let children grow up and risk damnation? Should we envy those children that died so young and so horribly?



I bet, I have a much simpler explanation... And an answer, as a bonus .



Yes, but I can prove to you that most of them, if not all, deluded themselves. That does not imply that believing in a glorious God that works in mysterious ways does not provide comfort against such losses, but I am not interested in psychology but in the metaphysical claim.

For instance, do you think it made a difference, apart from her natural quest for explanations, for a young Roman woman, who just lost her kid, to give glory to Jupiter or Apollo?

Ciao

- viole

Would it bother you if they had praised Zeus and Apollo or Artemis, or Athena?

They are a different thing since we have CNN. I am sure there have been famines in the past that exterminated children (expendable, if they cannot go hunting) without nobody knowing it. So, historically, they are very close to natual disasters.

If we consider everything, I think we have good reasons to deduce that God, if He exists, does not care about childrens lives. Unless, of course, He likes to have them with Himself in Heaven, which, alas, would beg the reverse question: why does He let children grow up and risk damnation? Should we envy those children that died so young and so horribly?



I bet, I have a much simpler explanation... And an answer, as a bonus .



Yes, but I can prove to you that most of them, if not all, deluded themselves. That does not imply that believing in a glorious God that works in mysterious ways does not provide comfort against such losses, but I am not interested in psychology but in the metaphysical claim.

For instance, do you think it made a difference, apart from her natural quest for explanations, for a young Roman woman, who just lost her kid, to give glory to Jupiter or Apollo?

Ciao

- viole

Maybe not Zeus and Apollo (or Athena or whomever), but some will praise Allah, and whatever God they follow, that is, if they actually praise their gods. Some theists don't. I don't believe it is delusion, although Mr. Dawkins would disagree with me.

 

[viole]

Would it bother you if they had praised Zeus and Apollo or Artemis, or Athena?

Not at all. Why should it bother me? i am not bothered by people who believe they saw Elvis alive, either.

Maybe not Zeus and Apollo (or Athena or whomever), but some will praise Allah, and whatever God they follow, that is, if they actually praise their gods. Some theists don't. I don't believe it is delusion, although Mr. Dawkins would disagree with me.

Why not Zeus or Apollo? They have the same evidence of being real as Allah or Jesus. So, what is wrong with them?
Does the plausibility of gods depend on the time they are believed in?

Ciao

- viole

 

[ChristineES]

Not at all. Why should it bother me? i am not bothered by people who believe they saw Elvis alive, either.



Why not Zeus or Apollo? They have the same evidence of being real as Allah or Jesus. So, what is wrong with them?
Does the plausibility of gods depend on the time they are believed in?

Ciao

- viole

Didn't say anything was wrong with them, it's just that not a lot of people worship them anymore.

 

[viole]

Didn't say anything was wrong with them, it's just that not a lot of people worship them anymore.

Does the amount of people worshipping X, today increases the pausibility of X? Was Apollo more plausible at the time of the Romans?

Ciao

- viole

 

[ChristineES]

Does the amount of people worshiping X, today increases the plausibility of X? Was Apollo more plausible at the time of the Romans?

Ciao

- viole

Or the Greeks. I studied Greek Mythology, not Roman Mythology. If the Greeks believed in Apollo, Zeus, Hera, Athena, etc, then that is who they would have praised. But this discussion isn't about the existence of various gods and I don't discuss the plausibility of God or gods, since it is faith-based.

 

[viole]

Or the Greeks. I studied Greek Mythology, not Roman Mythology. If the Greeks believed in Apollo, Zeus, Hera, Athena, etc, then that is who they would have praised. But this discussion isn't about the existence of various gods and I don't discuss the plausibility of God or gods, since it is faith-based.

Yes, my bad, I thought that Apollo was Roman. Alas, I forgot all my classical education, it seems.

The question is: do you think they deluded themselves by glorifying Apollo because of losing their kid?

[yes/no]

Ciao

- viole

 

[Awoon]

I dont think that is quite what Jesus illustration meant. Its not not to be taken literally my friend.

Strange. Jesus tells you to do something to help Humanity and you say it isn't literal...HMMMM

 

[savagewind]

The JW's are not trying to get people to join their group.

Why not? The Bible says it is baptism that saves a person. Jehovah's Witnesses say that their baptism is the only righteous baptism. So? Why are the JWs NOT trying to get people to join them?

 

[Musty]

God gave man something called "free will". He does not force you to do anything. if people are willing to let children starve, God will not interfere. When Jesus returns to earth people will learn the proper way to live and act. then people will not allow children to starve.

The problem (Or not depending on how you look at) with this argument is that a universe with a God that doesn't intervene and a universe with a God that doesn't exist become indistinguishable.

I'd also point out that waiting for Jesus to return before doing something to deal with world hunger probably isn't the most ethical thing to do . We should be trying to sort it out ourselves. We certainly have the capability if we had the will.

 

[ChristineES]

Yes, my bad, I thought that Apollo was Roman. Alas, I forgot all my classical education, it seems.

The question is: do you think they deluded themselves by glorifying Apollo because of losing their kid?

[yes/no]

Ciao

- viole

No. I don't think they were deluding themselves. The only people deluding themselves are the ones who, deep down, don't truly believe in God and keep trying to force themselves to keep believing; and yes, there are those types. Most of we believers truly do believe in God.

 

[savagewind]

The problem (Or not depending on how you look at) with this argument is that a universe with a God that doesn't intervene and a universe with a God that doesn't exist become indistinguishable.

I'd also point out that waiting for Jesus to return before doing something to deal with world hunger probably isn't the most ethical thing to do . We should be trying to sort it out ourselves. We certainly have the capability if we had the will.

I am confident that there is heavenly intervention, but not in the world's affairs. Mind your own business says the word which is attributed to God. That is what God does. God mind's God's own business.

If heaven caused the feeding of some children then it would have to feed all the children according to the rule; God is not partial. Acts 10:34

I agree with you that "we have the capability". But the majority does not have the will, unfortunately. The world is too busy eating, drinking, buying and selling to worry about where there is a lack and why.

 

[Musty]

I am confident that there is heavenly intervention, but not in the world's affairs. Mind your own business says the word which is attributed to God. That is what God does. God mind's God's own business.

If heaven caused the feeding of some children then it would have to feed all the children according to the rule; God is not partial. Acts 10:34

I agree with you that "we have the capability". But the majority does not have the will, unfortunately. The world is too busy eating, drinking, buying and selling to worry about where there is a lack and why.

Fundamentally though if God created the universe then it deliberately created a universe with suffering that it then choose to sit back and do nothing about to give some of it's creations the opportunity to try and fix it's deliberate act of cruelty.

Seems a bit sick really.

 

[savagewind]

Fundamentally though if God created the universe then it deliberately created a universe with suffering that it then choose to sit back and do nothing about to give some of it's creations the opportunity to try and fix it's deliberate act of cruelty.

Seems a bit sick really.

God is not doing nothing about it. Every Jesus Christ believer knows that.
Suffering causes stress. Life would not be the same without stress. Life is good.

Try to imagine a world with no stress and no suffering. But suffering has got out of hand. That is true. It wasn't God that put it out of hand.

 

[Nada]

Why not? The Bible says it is baptism that saves a person. Jehovah's Witnesses say that their baptism is the only righteous baptism. So? Why are the JWs NOT trying to get people to join them?

No, they show the truth about baptism,according to the holy scriptures,and follow the example set.Then they preach this to the world.All according to the holy scriptures.But I don't have to tell you that now do I?
You are a baptized Jehovahs Witness.

 

[savagewind]

No, they show the truth about baptism,according to the holy scriptures,and follow the example set.Then they preach this to the world.All according to the holy scriptures.But I don't have to tell you that now do I?
You are a baptized Jehovahs Witness.

Yah!

 

[Nada]

Yah!

weh

 

[savagewind]

weh
Blunt rebuttal to (almost) any argument or statement. Proper use of the word can instantly kill off even the most enthusiastic and considered theory or insult.
1. Oli: The differences between so-called races are so small as to be negligible.
Leigh: Wehhh

2. Dino: You're one fat f-ck
Leigh: Wehhh

I don't DO sarcasm.