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

[SeekingAllTruth]

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

You'd do well to reflect on Epicurus, noted Greek philosopher:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent.
Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?
Is he both unable and unwilling? Then why call him God?

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

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.”

The first is a genuine miracle and should have been written up in a scientific journal. Video of this action should have been made on a cellphone. Think of the people who would become instant believers in Jesus. Was this occurrence documented in any way?

The second can be explained by natural processes, sorry. Mind over matter. The first cannot be explained away in this fashion.

The third, again migraines have suddenly gone away simply by the belief God will cure them.

Where are your parents today? And why don't they have a healing ministry? The first has never been done that I know of. By all laws of medicine it is impossible. Why does God choose to cure this one farmer in isolation and not millions of others who have much greater needs? 2nd degree burns would have healed with no scaring on their own.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

There is help at hand from God if we choose to use it.

God never abandons us but expects us to meet Him halfway and to make an effort.

He brings us new laws for each age that will definitely work, that’s His part. Out part is to implement them. The problem is we think we know better so we reject His laws until the unthinkable happens and our much vaunted civilisation collapses.

But must we always wait until then?

We’ve tried all sorts of systems, communism, socialism, nationalism and democracy but there are major flaws in each. We just can’t seem to get the balance right.

God knew this and so sent a Representative with a blueprint to how to create a functioning, harmonious world civilisation. The rest is up to us.

I don't believe an omnipotent God should force weak people to come to Him. We are weak and doubtful because God created us that way. My son when he was a baby was weak and helpless. I didn't expect him to crawl to me and ask me to change his diaper. I did it because I loved him. If God loved us He would come to us. Jesus said, "I'm knocking at your door." I've never heard a knock even though I've invited him to dinner several times. After repeatedly getting stood up I stopped inviting.

 

[Twilight Hue]

My prayers have manifested them self at more then one time. So for me it is not just wishful thinking

Me too, but I never pray for them.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

That’s how it was remembered but obviously not true. Jesus would have never said ask for anything you want and you will get it. That defies common sense.

cOLTER, there is a very good commonsense reason why these promises appear so frequently in the Bible. It's no accident they are there. They were put there for a very good reason. I'll get to the reason why later.

cOLTER, I did say I'd address the commonsense issue. Here it is. Please keep in mind I don't have written evidence for any of this. It is just my considered opinion and commonsense based on how the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle fit together:

Evidence for Jesus, outside mention of a Jesus in Josephus written 70 years after the fact, simply doesn't exist. As the religion started growing pagans naturally asked "Why should we give up our gods for yours especially when you have no evidence Jesus is even real?" The church leaders had a powwow. It was decided that if they wrote into the Bible numerous promises made by Jesus and Paul that if they prayed for anything in Jesus' name they would receive it. It was a powerful incentive to join the new religion. And it worked. Then the doctrine of faith was added because the prayers simply weren't being answered. "God will answer. But it must be done in His time, not yours. You must have faith". And that's why the promise God will answer prayers if believers pray in Jesus name is the only promise to appear in all four gospels. No other promise made by Jesus does that.

 

[Trailblazer]

You'd do well to reflect on Epicurus, noted Greek philosopher:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent.
Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?
Is he both unable and unwilling? Then why call him God?

I agree with most of what you say about God leaving us standing on the side of the road, etc., but I cannot agree with what Epicurus said because it is illogical and inane.

Why should God prevent the evil that people cause owing to the free will choices that they make?
To say that God is omnipotent so God could prevent all evil is completely irrelevant.
There is no reason God should or would do everything He is capable of doing.
Since we have free will to choose good or evil, it is our responsibility to choose good over evil.
No court of law ever held God responsible for a murder that was committed by a man or woman.

"Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent."

That is so inane. Why should God be "willing" to do what humans think He should do, as if humans could ever know more than an omniscient God regarding the best course of action. God is not a short order cook. Basically he is saying the God is malevolent because He does not hop to and do what I think He should do, take responsibility for what evil people do and prevent their evil choices from being acted out. That would not solve anything because those people would still be evil people. And how would that pay out in the real world? God would either have to take their free will to act away or all people who would potentially commit evil acts would have to be put in prison, before they even committed any crimes.

"Is he both unable and unwilling? Then why call him God?"

I would call Him God if He is able but unwilling to do what humans want Him to do, because an omnipotent God never does anything He does not choose to do, period. If what God choose to do aligns with what humans want Him to do, that is only because God chose to do it. The following three quotes sum up what it means to be an omnipotent God.

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Gleanings, p. 73

“Say: O people! Let not this life and its deceits deceive you, for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will. He bestoweth His favor on whom He willeth, and from whom He willeth He taketh it away. He doth whatsoever He chooseth.” Gleanings, p. 209

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.” Gleanings, p, 284

 

[sojourner]

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

Mom doesn’t do burns. She does pain.

 

[sojourner]

The first is a genuine miracle and should have been written up in a scientific journal. Video of this action should have been made on a cellphone. Think of the people who would become instant believers in Jesus. Was this occurrence documented in any way?

The second can be explained by natural processes, sorry. Mind over matter. The first cannot be explained away in this fashion.

The third, again migraines have suddenly gone away simply by the belief God will cure them.

Where are your parents today? And why don't they have a healing ministry? The first has never been done that I know of. By all laws of medicine it is impossible. Why does God choose to cure this one farmer in isolation and not millions of others who have much greater needs? 2nd degree burns would have healed with no scaring on their own.

No, this happened in the 60s with Dad. In my own case, Mom didn’t tell me what she was doing. In fact, my eyes were closed and she didn’t actually touch me. I suddenly felt the pain drain and I opened my eyes, saw her there standing over my leg and said, “the pain is gone.” She said, “I know.” Later she told me what she had done.

Das’s gone now. Mom’s in a care center.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

No, this happened in the 60s with Dad. In my own case, Mom didn’t tell me what she was doing. In fact, my eyes were closed and she didn’t actually touch me. I suddenly felt the pain drain and I opened my eyes, saw her there standing over my leg and said, “the pain is gone.” She said, “I know.” Later she told me what she had done.

Das’s gone now. Mom’s in a care center.

In the care center, does she still have to power to heal? I've never heard a 1st-hand account of this. I sincerely wish you'd get some documentation of this if she can still do it. It would be a powerful testimony to the power of prayer. I sincerely hope you make a record of this.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

I agree with most of what you say about God leaving us standing on the side of the road, etc., but I cannot agree with what Epicurus said because it is illogical and inane.

Why should God prevent the evil that people cause owing to the free will choices that they make?
To say that God is omnipotent so God could prevent all evil is completely irrelevant.
There is no reason God should or would do everything He is capable of doing.
Since we have free will to choose good or evil, it is our responsibility to choose good over evil.
No court of law ever held God responsible for a murder that was committed by a man or woman.

"Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent."

That is so inane. Why should God be "willing" to do what humans think He should do, as if humans could ever know more than an omniscient God regarding the best course of action. God is not a short order cook. Basically he is saying the God is malevolent because He does not hop to and do what I think He should do, take responsibility for what evil people do and prevent their evil choices from being acted out. That would not solve anything because those people would still be evil people. And how would that pay out in the real world? God would either have to take their free will to act away or all people who would potentially commit evil acts would have to be put in prison, before they even committed any crimes.

"Is he both unable and unwilling? Then why call him God?"

I would call Him God if He is able but unwilling to do what humans want Him to do, because an omnipotent God never does anything He does not choose to do, period. If what God choose to do aligns with what humans want Him to do, that is only because God chose to do it. The following three quotes sum up what it means to be an omnipotent God.

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Gleanings, p. 73

“Say: O people! Let not this life and its deceits deceive you, for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will. He bestoweth His favor on whom He willeth, and from whom He willeth He taketh it away. He doth whatsoever He chooseth.” Gleanings, p. 209

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.” Gleanings, p, 284

I think Epicurus was addressing the whole of humanity, not any specific subsets of circumstances. Naturally God is not going to stop a burglar from stealing. But a child being raped and then murdered? Certainly God is not going to step in and save one child while letting millions of others fall victim. Nor is He going to miraculously step in and prevent them all. But the scope of evil in this world is so great--poverty, starvation, disease, rape, murder, trafficking, slavery, religious execution and this is but 5% of all the evil out there. We haven't even touched natural disasters, deadly bugs, mosquitoes which kill more people than any other creature. I mean does it really have to be like this????? The intelligent person has to ask, "How on earth could God be so inept as to set up a system of civilization where so much suffering has to occur in order to make it function. Watch this short video. Roughly 800,000 people suffer from this condition it is estimated. Is this kind of pain really necessary for the world to function? They're called "suicide" headaches AKA trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia aka Cluster Headaches. Many of those 800,000 have these several times a day. Think of it! Could you live with this pain. I know I couldn't.

 

[Glaurung]

We're using rape as an example of immoral behavior.

You said:

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.​

The only way you could get a world where rape could not occur without taking away human agency would be to create a world where humans don't have sex. But humans are a sexual species and humans have moral agency. The good thing about free will is that we can choose to do good things. The flip side is that we can choose do bad things as well. If God were to intervene every time someone were to do something bad to someone else the world would find itself crippled very quickly. It would be unworkable. Especially taking into account making good or bad choices is the crux this life rests upon. We are here precisely to make that decision.

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?

When I say God I mean the all-pervading reality from which all things take their existence. Nothing exists but the all-pervading and all-sustaining reality of God. There is no goodness apart from God because there is nothing whatsoever apart from God. But let's say God gives you what you want. He deals with evil the moment it appears. Nothing bad will happen in this world ever again. God enacts his justice right here and now (in this life) as he will at the final judgment. What would happen? It would mean the immediate death and damnation of every human being alive because no one is innocent, no one is without sin. Are you pure? Are you free from all evil inclinations? Have you lived a life of moral perfection? Because nothing less is acceptable to God.

Or is it rather you want God to act only within your standards? Never mind the omniscience of the infinite. You know better... You are wiser than the creator of the cosmos.

 

[Trailblazer]

I think Epicurus was addressing the whole of humanity, not any specific subsets of circumstances. Naturally God is not going to stop a burglar from stealing. But a child being raped and then murdered? Certainly God is not going to step in and save one child while letting millions of others fall victim. Nor is He going to miraculously step in and prevent them all. But the scope of evil in this world is so great--poverty, starvation, disease, rape, murder, trafficking, slavery, religious execution and this is but 5% of all the evil out there. We haven't even touched natural disasters, deadly bugs, mosquitoes which kill more people than any other creature. I mean does it really have to be like this????? The intelligent person has to ask, "How on earth could God be so inept as to set up a system of civilization where so much suffering has to occur in order to make it function. Watch this short video. Roughly 800,000 people suffer from this condition it is estimated. Is this kind of pain really necessary for the world to function? They're called "suicide" headaches AKA trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia aka Cluster Headaches. Many of those 800,000 have these several times a day. Think of it! Could you live with this pain. I know I couldn't.

You're preaching to the choir.
All I can say is that I don't know why God had to create a world in which there would be so much suffering, but I cannot consider such a God omnibenevolent because it makes no logical sense to me. Perhaps I will change my mind after I die and understand why it had to be this way, but for now I have to go with what makes sense.

Baha'is believe that we are in a transition period from an old age and we are moving into a new age, but we are barely into the new age so what we see now is mostly reflecting the age that humanity has been living in for thousands of years. We believe the world will be a lot different in the future and that there will be no more suffering from evil acts committed by humans. Natural disasters and diseases that bring on suffering will also be greatly reduced or even eliminated. This will come about by the spiritualization of humanity as well as by advances in science and technology, all of which have great potential to change the world.

“With the establishment of the Most Great Peace and the spiritualization of the peoples of the world, man will become a noble being adorned with divine virtues and perfections. This is one of the fruits of the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, promised by Him. The nobility of man and his spiritual development will lead him in the future to such a position that no individual could enjoy eating his food or resting at home while knowing that there was one person somewhere in the world without food or shelter. It is Bahá’u’lláh’s mission to create such a new race of men.” (Adib Taherzadeh, The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh v 3, p. 126)

New Race of Men

 

[Trailblazer]

The only way you could get a world where rape could not occur without taking away human agency would be to create a world where humans don't have sex.

No, there is another way. If humans all followed the Laws of God there would be no more rape or any other crimes.

“God hath in that Book, and by His behest, decreed as lawful whatsoever He hath pleased to decree, and hath, through the power of His sovereign might, forbidden whatsoever He elected to forbid. To this testifieth the text of that Book. Will ye not bear witness? Men, however, have wittingly broken His law. Is such a behavior to be attributed to God, or to their proper selves? Be fair in your judgment. Every good thing is of God, and every evil thing is from yourselves. Will ye not comprehend? This same truth hath been revealed in all the Scriptures, if ye be of them that understand.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 149-150

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

You're preaching to the choir.
All I can say is that I don't know why God had to create a world in which there would be so much suffering, but I cannot consider such a God omnibenevolent because it makes no logical sense to me. Perhaps I will change my mind after I die and understand why it had to be this way, but for now I have to go with what makes sense.

Baha'is believe that we are in a transition period from an old age and we are moving into a new age, but we are barely into the new age so what we see now is mostly reflecting the age that humanity has been living in for thousands of years. We believe the world will be a lot different in the future and that there will be no more suffering from evil acts committed by humans. Natural disasters and diseases that bring on suffering will also be greatly reduced or even eliminated. This will come about by the spiritualization of humanity as well as by advances in science and technology, all of which have great potential to change the world.

“With the establishment of the Most Great Peace and the spiritualization of the peoples of the world, man will become a noble being adorned with divine virtues and perfections. This is one of the fruits of the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, promised by Him. The nobility of man and his spiritual development will lead him in the future to such a position that no individual could enjoy eating his food or resting at home while knowing that there was one person somewhere in the world without food or shelter. It is Bahá’u’lláh’s mission to create such a new race of men.” (Adib Taherzadeh, The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh v 3, p. 126)

New Race of Men

I like the Baha’i Faith. If I were to think of joining a faith it would be one like this--very benign without all the condemnation and ridiculousness of the Christian faith. All I can say is the New Age can't get here soon enough.

 

[ppp]

The only way you could get a world where rape could not occur without taking away human agency would be to create a world where humans don't have sex.

That is demonstrably false. On multiple levels.
Desire: If you do not desire to sexually assault someone, yet still desire to have sex, then you still have agency. The world is full of activities that I have the ability to perform, but have no desire to do so. And yet I still have agency.

Ability: We could simply be unable to do so. Your inability to telepathically invade my mind does not impede your agency.

Restraint: If I stop an assault am I taking away the agency of the attacker? I don't think so. Even a person locked in a small room has agency. God could simply physically restrain the attacker as I would.

But even if my interference does take away the agency of the attacker, so what? What about the agency of the victim? By calling the agency of the attacker inviolate, you are valuing the agency of the attacker above that of the victim. You *(or God) are favoring the agency of the immoral aggressor over that of the moral prey.

If God were to intervene every time someone were to do something bad to someone else the world would find itself crippled very quickly. It would be unworkable.

You say this, and I am sure that you believe it, but I don't think you have thought this out on a practical level. I think that you are just accepting the doctrine that you have heard and adopted without due scrutiny. You say it is unworkable, but lets say that every time someone tried to non-consensually assault someone else, they could not succeed. Their hands slipped away, they missed any attack, they tripped and fell, they be came dizzy, or whatever. The possibilities are endless. How would this make the rest of the world "unworkable"?

There is no goodness apart from God because there is nothing whatsoever apart from God.

That is what your doctrine says, but that doctrine is not holding up to scrutiny. As of yet, your god does not measure up to my minimal standards of morality. Can you demonstrate that your god is actually moral. I don't mean just repeat what the doctrine baldly asserts. Not just saying that we must take it on faith. I mean can you demonstrate that God closing the door and walking away is a good and moral action.

God enacts his justice right here and now (in this life) as he will at the final judgment. What would happen? It would mean the immediate death and damnation of every human being alive because no one is innocent, no one is without sin.

This is not an excuse. This would just be another evil act on the part of God. Torturing people for not meeting some standard that he specifically and intentionally designed them to be unable to meet. This is worse behavior than the rapist. Uhg!

Are you pure? Are you free from all evil inclinations? Have you lived a life of moral perfection? Because nothing less is acceptable to God.

I am morally superior to the God that you are depicting here. And so are you. And so is everyone whom I have ever met or heard of.

 

[ppp]

I like the Baha’i Faith. If I were to think of joining a faith it would be one like this--very benign without all the condemnation and ridiculousness of the Christian faith. All I can say is the New Age can't get here soon enough.

They want a Ba'hai theocracy.
I grant that they are not Christian Dominionists. But being humans with a theocratic ideal, that change will come with power.

 

[ppp]

@Musing Bassist, in your doctrine, does God have moral agency?

 

[Trailblazer]

I like the Baha’i Faith. If I were to think of joining a faith it would be one like this--very benign without all the condemnation and ridiculousness of the Christian faith. All I can say is the New Age can't get here soon enough.

Baha'is believe that the Kingdom of God will be built during the New Age, and this is also called the new world order.

“Beseech ye the one true God to grant that all men may be graciously assisted to fulfil that which is acceptable in Our sight. Soon will the present-day order be rolled up, and a new one spread out in its stead. Verily, thy Lord speaketh the truth, and is the Knower of things unseen.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 7

One essential difference between Baha'is and Christians is that Baha'is believe that humans will build the Kingdom of God on earth by following the blueprint instructions of Baha'u'llah, whereas Christians believe that Jesus is going to return and build a Kingdom single-handedly, so they won't have to do anything. The whole world will just be transformed instantly by Jesus -- no more war, poverty, racial prejudice, etc., and even climate change will be turned around. As a Baha'i I consider this magical thinking. Moreover, Jesus never even promised to return, He said His work was finished here and He was no more in the world and that His Kingdom is not of this world, (John 14:19, John 17:4, John 17:11, John 19:30, John 18:36). As such, what Christians believe will happen is not even supported by their own scriptures.

One thing that is holding up the ushering in of the New Age is the small number of Baha'is owing to the fact that most Christians have rejected Baha'u'llah and thus the Baha'i Faith, mostly because they continue to wait for Jesus. Baha'u'llah claimed to be the return of Christ and the Messiah the Jews await but obviously we cannot all be right, since we disagree about who that Messiah was or will be.

FYI, there is no such thing as a "Baha'i theocracy" because Baha'is are disallowed from involvement in politics, except to vote.

“The Faith which this order serves, safeguards and promotes is … essentially supernatural, supranational, entirely non-political, non-partisan, and diametrically opposed to any policy or school of thought that seeks to exalt any particular race, class or nation.” The Promised Day Is Come, vi

Moreover, any new world order that will come about will be strictly voluntary, never forced upon anyone. Membership in the Baha'i Faith will always be strictly voluntary, as it is now. We have no idea what a new world order will look like but the most we can say is that in the future, governments might choose to pattern their governing after Baha'i principles when they realize it is in their best advantage.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I don't believe an omnipotent God should force weak people to come to Him. We are weak and doubtful because God created us that way. My son when he was a baby was weak and helpless. I didn't expect him to crawl to me and ask me to change his diaper. I did it because I loved him. If God loved us He would come to us. Jesus said, "I'm knocking at your door." I've never heard a knock even though I've invited him to dinner several times. After repeatedly getting stood up I stopped inviting.

Doesn’t it say somewhere that man is created in the image of God? So I would imagine we’ve been given all the necessary qualities to make a good go of life here. By knocking at the door I believe that means His Message is heard by everyone in the world. So you haven’t heard of the existence of the Gospels or Quran or Bhagavad-Gita etc? When we hear about these things, that’s the knock on the door of our hearts. Then it’s up to us whether we let God into our lives or not. That is, follow His ways and counsels instead of our own ideas.

 

[1213]

Do you pray to Krishna, Odin, or the other ... gods of millions on earth?

No.