NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, I was reading Letters from the Earth by Mark Twain, when I came across this passage.

It is curious -- the way the human mind works. The Christian begins with this straight proposition, this definite proposition, this inflexible and uncompromising proposition: God is all-knowing, and all-powerful.

This being the case, nothing can happen without his knowing beforehand that it is going to happen; nothing happens without his permission; nothing can happen that he chooses to prevent.

That is definite enough, isn't it? It makes the Creator distinctly responsible for everything that happens, doesn't it?

The Christian concedes it in that italicized sentence. Concedes it with feeling, with enthusiasm.

Then, having thus made the Creator responsible for all those pains and diseases and miseries above enumerated, and which he could have prevented, the gifted Christian blandly calls him Our Father!

Now, I find this interesting. It is not my intention to start a flame war.

Rather, I want to see what the response from believers is to this attack. I would like to see both sides of the issue.

Well, wouldn't God have to allow such things to happen because of free will?

Well, wouldn't God have to allow such things to happen because of free will?

But then God is not all powerful. Another Catholic koan, perhaps? ;)

well the lord works in mysterious ways (plus I think its all parenting if we didn’t have these horrible things would we really bother getting up in the morning?)

not a Christian just thought I'd jam my interpretation in

We chose to sin. God allowed us to do it and knew and planned for us to do it. But we were still the ones who rebelled. We are responsible, not God. How can this be? We don't know, we only know that it must be. Just because we don't understand it, doesn't mean it is not so.

Ephesians 1:11 "In him [Jesus] we have obtained an inheritances, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will."

James 1:13 "Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he tempts no one."

Psalms 145:17 "The Lord is righteous in all his ways and kind in all his works."

We chose to sin. God allowed us to do it and knew and planned for us to do it. But we were still the ones who rebelled. We are responsible, not God. How can this be? We don't know, we only know that it must be. Just because we don't understand it, doesn't mean it is not so.

Ephesians 1:11 "In him [Jesus] we have obtained an inheritances, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will."

James 1:13 "Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he tempts no one."

Psalms 145:17 "The Lord is righteous in all his ways and kind in all his works."

So it boils down to original sin? That's interesting...

Here's another Twain quote from Letters on that subject

To proceed with the Biblical curiosities. Naturally you will think the threat to punish Adam and Eve for disobeying was of course not carried out, since they did not create themselves, nor their natures nor their impulses nor their weaknesses, and hence were not properly subject to anyone's commands, and not responsible to anybody for their acts. It will surprise you to know that the threat was carried out. Adam and Eve were punished, and that crime finds apologists unto this day. The sentence of death was executed.

As you perceive, the only person responsible for the couple's offense escaped; and not only escaped but became the executioner of the innocent.

In your country and mine we should have the privilege of making fun of this kind of morality, but it would be unkind to do it here. Many of these people have the reasoning faculty, but no one uses it in religious matters.

The best minds will tell you that when a man has begotten a child he is morally bound to tenderly care for it, protect it from hurt, shield it from disease, clothe it, feed it, bear with its waywardness, lay no hand upon it save in kindness and for its own good, and never in any case inflict upon it a wanton cruelty. God's treatment of his earthly children, every day and every night, is the exact opposite of all that, yet those best minds warmly justify these crimes, condone them, excuse them, and indignantly refuse to regard them as crimes at all, when he commits them. Your country and mine is an interesting one, but there is nothing there that is half so interesting as the human mind.

Very well, God banished Adam and Eve from the Garden, and eventually assassinated them. All for disobeying a command which he had no right to utter. But he did not stop there, as you will see. He has one code of morals for himself, and quite another for his children. He requires his children to deal justly -- and gently -- with offenders, and forgive them seventy-and-seven times; whereas he deals neither justly nor gently with anyone, and he did not forgive the ignorant and thoughtless first pair of juveniles even their first small offense and say, "You may go free this time, and I will give you another chance."

But then God is not all powerful. Another Catholic koan, perhaps? ;)

Unless he's so powerful that he is capable of limiting himself to follow the laws he created willingly?

Unless he's so powerful that he is capable of limiting himself to follow the laws he created willingly?

But he still consents to it all happening, from the very best to the very worst.

All powerful may not necessarily refer to the ability choose to do anything; it may simply refer to being the means by which anything that happens, happens, regardless of conscious influence.

Neat passage though.

So it boils down to original sin? That's interesting...

Here's another Twain quote from Letters on that subject

Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,"

Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

So God does forgive, if you repent.

Also, Twain pretends to know whether Adam and Eve were forgiven, which he cannot possibly know: the Bible does not tell us.

But he still consents to it all happening, from the very best to the very worst.

But consent and approval are not the same thing. God might allow something to happen out of necessary, but that doesn't mean he approves of it.

But then God is not all powerful. Another Catholic koan, perhaps? ;)

koan? I'm not familiar with the term.

In any case, there are a variety of ways Christians could deal with the question posed.

1. Abdicate the position that God is omnipotent since it's really not essential to Christian theology.

2. Proffer the idea that it is only our limited human perception which sees these things as miseries, and that they are in actuality what happens in a perfect or good world. (This of course leaves another line of attack open, but one resolvable by a different version of the same argument.)

3. Take the position that as a consequence of God's omnibenevolence he would give us free will, which explains the problems of the world. (This leaves several lines of attack open.)

4. Various versions of "God works in mysterious ways", which while true, does leave much to be desired in terms of an adequate explanation for evil.

5. Posit an evil entity that generates the evil in the world. (This also leaves several lines of attack open.)

koan? I'm not familiar with the term.


A koan is a seemingly contradictory statement that is meant to be meditated upon in order to find the hidden meaning and achieve a higher level of enlightenment.

For example "what is the sound of one hand clapping?"

A koan is a seemingly contradictory statement that is meant to be meditated upon in order to find the hidden meaning and achieve a higher level of enlightenment.

For example "what is the sound of one hand clapping?"

An interesting idea. Thank you.

life is like a big jigsaw puzzle, say one with 349 billion peices, only we as humans during our short lives only see about 10, even with 10 peices the whole picture we see is nothing, it doesn't make any sense and it's ugly.

I trust that God can see all of it, and the ugly parts are useful, or even better not ugly at all, just distorted because I can't tell a dog's ass from a flower, being that I have such limited knowledge and understanding.

I have been up for almost 50 hours, I am going to sleep now, please forgive the blech-ness of the above postage.

koan? I'm not familiar with the term.

In any case, there are a variety of ways Christians could deal with the question posed.

1. Abdicate the position that God is omnipotent since it's really not essential to Christian theology.

2. Proffer the idea that it is only our limited human perception which sees these things as miseries, and that they are in actuality what happens in a perfect or good world. (This of course leaves another line of attack open, but one resolvable by a different version of the same argument.)

3. Take the position that as a consequence of God's omnibenevolence he would give us free will, which explains the problems of the world. (This leaves several lines of attack open.)

4. Various versions of "God works in mysterious ways", which while true, does leave much to be desired in terms of an adequate explanation for evil.

5. Posit an evil entity that generates the evil in the world. (This also leaves several lines of attack open.)

The answer is 2, of course. But that doesn't mean this is a perfectly good world YET (variance of your choice of wording done on purpose), but this world WILL be perfected after the apocalypse and the thousand year reign and eventually the final victory and the utter perfection of the good and perfect world you mentioned to be finished.

Isn't the whole concept of omnipotence essentially irrational? There's the paradox of the stone:

If god is omnipotent, can he create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it?

or alternately:

If god is omnipotent, can he create a stone so immutable that he cannot change its characteristics?

In either case if god creates a stone so heavy (immutable) that he cannot lift (alter) it he ceases to be omnipotent. Likewise, if god cannot create a stone heavy (immutable) enough to prevent his lifting (altering) it then he is not truly omnipotent.

Brilliant Descartes rejected this argument and maintained that god is omnipotent, much in the style of Einstein & quantum theory. Other philosophers and theologians have established varying "levels of omnipotence" or resorted to semantic arguments. Whichever way you cut it, it's still bullshit.

Concerning god's omnibenevolence, there simply is not an argument that has convinced me that an omnibenevolent god would allow a drunk driver to kill an excellent mother of eleven, or allow a small child to contract brain cancer, or an infinite number of other tragedies. Of course, ask Leibniz. He says, "God assuredly always chooses the best" in this, "the best of all possible worlds".

Voltaire would disagree. (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/voltaire/candide.html) (A link to _Candide_ - I recommend it! It's hilarious & enlightening.)

J.

Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,"

Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

So God does forgive, if you repent.

Also, Twain pretends to know whether Adam and Eve were forgiven, which he cannot possibly know: the Bible does not tell us.

Regarding divine forgiveness: God essentially grants a pardon if the individual accepts Christ as his or her savior. That's swell, but it doesn't change the fact that God had no right to punish Adam and Eve in the First place.

God, instead, chose not to punish the real guilty party, Satan, and set him instead as executioner of the innocent, while eternally punishing all of humanity for the crimes of two individuals who had no way of knowing the difference between right and wrong.

Whether or not they were forgiven is irrelevant; Adam and Eve, and the rest of Humanity got the short end of the stick.

But then God is not all powerful. Another Catholic koan, perhaps? ;)

Not true. Why cannot God sovereignly allow us to have free will? I view it much like a scientist performing an experiment. He mixes the chemicals together and they react on their own, but he still has a guiding hand in it all, watching over it, ready to intercede at given points in time.

Of course, I'm not perfect, either so I could be wrong. But I don't think I am. ;)

Well, wouldn't God have to allow such things to happen because of free will?

No. No more than we have to let people kill each other because of free will.

Jus ta random thought but couldn't it be that they just don't matter, I mean if there is a life after this that is enternal frankly what does a littel suffering now matter when we're going to wind up in that eternal life any way once this is over. I mean if we have eternety on one hand and some 100 years tops here doesn't that render everything that happens in this world rather inconsecuential. Of course this can be effected by the different theologies then applied to the this basic concept of short time here long time there.

Jus ta random thought but couldn't it be that they just don't matter, I mean if there is a life after this that is enternal frankly what does a littel suffering now matter when we're going to wind up in that eternal life any way once this is over. I mean if we have eternety on one hand and some 100 years tops here doesn't that render everything that happens in this world rather inconsecuential.

But, good Sir, what, indeed, is the consequence of this tenet? Should we permit torture, disease, murder, rape, war, ad infinitum, because, quite frankly, suffering now doesn't matter a bit? Suffer inhuman treatment at the hands of your masters, submit, submit, submit to the painful eventualities of life, and struggle not one bit to better your Self, your lot, or the lot of others; because, quite frankly, it doesn't matter a bit.

No, what happens in this world is extremely important, particularly when we're not receiving any "divine" assistance. All we can honestly say is that it's humans for humans and we're the only beings making a damn bit of difference in this world.

J.

If God can do everything, can he make a rock so heavy He can't lift it?

Of course not, that would be to contradict His nature. In fact the Bible itself points out things that God can't do. See Titus 1:2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus%201;&version=49;), which says God cannot lie. It's along this line that Christians (C.S. Lewis, I'm thinking specifically) argue that nature of God is the definition of good. Evil is what doesn't conform to that.

Anyway, what I really wanted to say is that Wikipedia has a nice article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodicy) on the subject which I would recommend reading.

But, good Sir, what, indeed, is the consequence of this tenet? Should we permit torture, disease, murder, rape, war, ad infinitum, because, quite frankly, suffering now doesn't matter a bit? Suffer inhuman treatment at the hands of your masters, submit, submit, submit to the painful eventualities of life, and struggle not one bit to better your Self, your lot, or the lot of others; because, quite frankly, it doesn't matter a bit.

No, what happens in this world is extremely important, particularly when we're not receiving any "divine" assistance. All we can honestly say is that it's humans for humans and we're the only beings making a damn bit of difference in this world.

J.From our perspective yes it it matters. How about, however, from the prospective of the proposed being which is out side of time and space, and knows that this is all less then the the blink of an eye in our eternal existance would it still hold the same vital importance? After all the question at hand isn't about our view of it, but why a being the resides beyond all the laws that define our existance might allow it.

From our perspective yes it it matters. How about, however, from the prospective of the proposed being which is out side of time and space, and knows that this is all less then the the blink of an eye in our eternal existance would it still hold the same vital importance? After all the question at hand isn't about our view of it, but why a being the resides beyond all the laws that define our existance might allow it.

Then gods cares not what happens during our inconsequential terrestrial existence, but still demands our obeisance and establishes a rigid code of conduct for a "blink of an eye". Should a god have gone to the trouble of creating this world and manufacturing bits to place in it, including humans, the only creature made in his image - ostensibly, god must care what happens here.

If not you are wandering into the territory of Deism, which does not postulate an omnibenevolent god, but rather a god who created a self-sustaining world, let us to our own and went on about his business.

J.

Then gods cares not what happens during our inconsequential terrestrial existence, but still demands our obeisance and establishes a rigid code of conduct for a "blink of an eye". Should a god have gone to the trouble of creating this world and manufacturing bits to place in it, including humans, the only creature made in his image - ostensibly, god must care what happens here.

If not you are wandering into the territory of Deism, which does not postulate an omnibenevolent god, but rather a god who created a self-sustaining world, let us to our own and went on about his business.

J.Which is why I said the basic concept varies depending on the theology attached. But speaking of a God that puts down rules, perhapse that is the manner in which it is attempting to prevent these problems? After all many religions have laws against murder. In another direction how do we know what qualifies as benevolent in the eyes of a being so far outside our fram of refference, the definitions of good and evil vary between groups among us and our individual frams of reference while not exactly the saem ae much more simmilar to each other than it with any being of that power. Or perhapse they are benevolent, but like parent must give us room to succeed or fail on our own if we are to grow. It thus provide guidance, but does not necesarily force our actions, in more than the laws of nature it established do, knowing that what ever evil we inflict is a merely temporary state of affairs. Its all rather facsinating to try and figure what might be going on in the mind of such a being.

But speaking of a God that puts down rules, perhapse that is the manner in which it is attempting to prevent these problems?

Cancer and car accidents? Natural disasters?


In another direction how do we know what qualifies as benevolent in the eyes of a being so far outside our fram of refference, the definitions of good and evil vary between groups among us and our individual frams of reference while not exactly the saem ae much more simmilar to each other than it with any being of that power. Or perhapse they are benevolent, but like parent must give us room to succeed or fail on our own if we are to grow. It thus provide guidance, but does not necesarily force our actions, in more than the laws of nature it established do, knowing that what ever evil we inflict is a merely temporary state of affairs. Its all rather facsinating to try and figure what might be going on in the mind of such a being.

The incongruity of the perception of good & evil across cultures brings into doubt the eden myth. Assuming I were xian and considered it an historical recording it stands to reason that since we partook of the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil, understanding these things as god himself understands, we can safely determine whether an occurrence is benefic or malefic.

If we are little replicas of god, imbued with the knowledge of good & evil, only lacking aeternal life (as we would have gained if we partook of the Tree of Life, and become precisely as god. He wasn't going to have any of that and kicked us out on our tuckus) then I can't accept that god is beyond our understanding.

Also assuming that an unchanging eternity awaited you, what does god have to worry about other than what happens here & now?

J.

Cancer and car accidents? Natural disasters? Are they necesarily evil though? To us yes, but to the being that is allowing them to happen all they do is united those killed with said being. Perhapse in the its view it is for some reason the apropriate time for those people to pass on. Or maybe perhapse the beings allowing their death prevents some greater disaster.
The incongruity of the perception of good & evil across cultures brings into doubt the eden myth. Assuming I were xian and considered it an historical recording it stands to reason that since we partook of the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil, understanding these things as god himself understands, we can safely determine whether an occurrence is benefic or malefic.

If we are little replicas of god, imbued with the knowledge of good & evil, only lacking aeternal life (as we would have gained if we partook of the Tree of Life, and become precisely as god. He wasn't going to have any of that and kicked us out on our tuckus) then I can't accept that god is beyond our understanding.

Also assuming that an unchanging eternity awaited you, what does god have to worry about other than what happens here & now?

J. But, not all christians believe that, Catholics for example hold that it is a metaphor.
And who says eternity has to be entirely unchanging or that even if it is their is nothing to do there after all all the people who have died are, or at least a good number of them. That should present the oppurtunity for good deal of interesting interaction.

Okay, I was reading Letters from the Earth by Mark Twain, when I came across this passage.


Should I mention that Letters from the Earth was written by Twain as a scholar of christian theology and thought at the time.... and was something he kept from being published and his kids because they knew people of the time weren't ready for it

nahh

We chose to sin. God allowed us to do it and knew and planned for us to do it. But we were still the ones who rebelled. We are responsible, not God. How can this be? We don't know, we only know that it must be. Just because we don't understand it, doesn't mean it is not so.

what's wrong with rebellion anyway? admitting god exists, I don't see why I should blindly obey what I see as arbitrary decisions from him, just because he created me.

But consent and approval are not the same thing. God might allow something to happen out of necessary, but that doesn't mean he approves of it.

how can an all-powerfull god be bound with necessary?

The answer is 2, of course. But that doesn't mean this is a perfectly good world YET (variance of your choice of wording done on purpose), but this world WILL be perfected after the apocalypse and the thousand year reign and eventually the final victory and the utter perfection of the good and perfect world you mentioned to be finished.

even if my perception is limited, if something hurts me, it hurts. or am I in fact enjoying it, but don't know it because of my limited perception?

From our perspective yes it it matters. How about, however, from the prospective of the proposed being which is out side of time and space, and knows that this is all less then the the blink of an eye in our eternal existance would it still hold the same vital importance? After all the question at hand isn't about our view of it, but why a being the resides beyond all the laws that define our existance might allow it.

if it doesn't matter for him wether we hurt or not during our stay on earth in the long run, I don't see why we should hurt instead of enjoying ourselves :fluffle: .

But then God is not all powerful. Another Catholic koan, perhaps? ;)
You think that just because God allows us free will, it means that he has no other choice?

But consent and approval are not the same thing. God might allow something to happen out of necessity, but that doesn't mean he approves of it.So he's unable to prevent it and thus limited.

what's wrong with rebellion anyway? admitting god exists, I don't see why I should blindly obey what I see as arbitrary decisions from him, just because he created me.

Because the Creator has the right to command the created and the created has the responsibility to obey. The created is not compeled to obey, not forced, but required.

So he's unable to prevent it and thus limited.
"All-powerful" does not include that power that does not exist; that would supercede the scope of the "all" in our understanding. Even an all-powerful thing can have limits.

"All-powerful" does not include that power that does not exist; that would supercede the scope of the "all" in our understanding. Even an all-powerful thing can have limits.

But, under Christian doctrine, God has the exclusive right to define reality. He can do anything under the Christian understanding of God.

And he knows everything. Therefore, he is responsible for everything that happens.

Sorry Christians.
I find something wrong with the Biblical idea that knowledge is wrong, any of it, and that disobedience to the idea "Because I said so" should be punished.
And I find it distinctly un-American.

I tend to prefer William S. Burroughs' approach to the issue...

"Consider the impasse of a one god universe. He is all-knowing and all-powerful. He can't go anywhere since he is already everywhere. He can't do anything since the act of doing presupposes opposition. His universe is irrevocably thermodynamic having no friction by definition. So he has to create friction. War, fear, sickness, death to keep his dying show on the road... "

Because the Creator has the right to command the created and the created has the responsibility to obey. The created is not compeled to obey, not forced, but required.

That's not very nice on his part.

Isn't the whole concept of omnipotence essentially irrational? There's the paradox of the stone:

If god is omnipotent, can he create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it?

Sure. And he can resolve whatever paradox you try to apply to him as well. Frankly, attacking God's omnipotence through contradiction just ain't effective.

even if my perception is limited, if something hurts me, it hurts. or am I in fact enjoying it, but don't know it because of my limited perception?

The question is more than just from the parameters of; the creation of our life until our physical death, this is not the end-all of the question from God's view or perception, but we tend to view it that way from our angle, with us not being able to see past the death event, yet, it's understandable why.

But our body's death is merely an event to God, where he can then give us our perfected bodies, a joyous occasion from the point of view from after the death event.

But as we travel through our lives, all of the events that occur are events we either endure or enjoy and all of the events work together to become our singular/personal story. We can choose to enjoy it, the good and the bad, from the angle that it is memories for us, one more thing we were allowed to witness and participate in, within the entire picture of the whole human race and it's condition.

If something hurts you, it is painful, but it is not painful forever, even if it kills you. To a lesser degree, you could see it this way, perhaps you do not enjoy a period in time in your life, say a stint of military service or a job contract you quickly discovered was not what you wanted or what you expected, and while you serve that obligation you are miserable. But after the event, you are relieved, and even longer after the event you are glad of some of your memories from that period of your life, and perhaps you are never even glad about it but you may have your very being shaped by the experience of having endured that period in your life.

Raw materials like wet clay are molded by a potter to become something better than they were before, something usable to the potter, or young new human beings fresh into starting their personal journeys in life, are molded by the potters hand to become more refined and perfected as they travel through their life. Pressure has to be applied to the source material to shape it. Some pots don't come out right, or they crack, or they refuse to be molded or don't hold their shape afterwards and they are thrown away by the potter. As we are molded though, we may accept it and learn from it, or refuse it and fight every inch of it, we may allow ourselves to become more perfected with each trial, or break ourselves further and further during the friction as we get older. Some will be keepers afterwards.

Sorry Christians.
I find something wrong with the Biblical idea that knowledge is wrong, any of it, and that disobedience to the idea "Because I said so" should be punished.
And I find it distinctly un-American.

Carnal knowledge is wrong, because I said so. It’s not just a pun.

Because the Creator has the right to command the created and the created has the responsibility to obey. The created is not compeled to obey, not forced, but required.You say. How do you know what the Creator wants? Are you his prophet?

Because the Creator has the right to command the created and the created has the responsibility to obey. The created is not compeled to obey, not forced, but required.

The flaws in your 'thinking'?

1) If a god exists, it won't necessaily be 'yours'.

2) If 'your' god exists, there is no reason to believe he is the only one.

3) Even if 'your' god is the only one, that still doesn't mean he/she 'created' anything.


So - why obey some set of rules attributed to this entity? When it can't be proved real, or unique, or to be responsible for 'creation'?

Hell - you can't even prove this 'god' fellow has given us anything to obey - you have no evidence outside of one set of books that have been constantly added to for three thousand years...

I think we got a wee bit off topic. The point that Trotskyilvania brought up has pretty much gone uncontested so far. Twain points out that God is responsible for EVERYTHING that goes on in the universe, both atrocities and boons to man. The few semi-answers that were given basically amount to the following:

1. "We can't comprehend what is good and bad, cause God is so cool."

What's wrong with this statement? While humans can be pretty damn ignorant, we all have a basic set of morals that we all generally accept. We agree that murder and rape are bad. We all feel that humans should do unto others as they would wish done unto them. Hell, look at the Ten Commandments or Allah's messages. God himself supposedly laid down the law! But Twains critique is that God has violated those very laws he set down. He flooded the earth, obliterating every last human save one family, (whom he wished to repopulate the earth, apparently, God has no problem with incest.) Or his order to kill an entire race of people. The point is: Humans can tell the smell of crap from the smell of roses. We can tell generally what is moral and what is unethical and according to the Bible's old book God is guilty of sins far worse than the darkest of human souls. Perhaps that’s were sin originated. After all, we apparently were created in his image. What? Too soon?

2. "Anything God does is by definition good."

What's wrong with this statement? A lot.
Apparently, Its ok to destroy entire races of people because they don't seem Christian enough! I'll just leave it at that.

3. "God works in (insert obscure mystical adj. here) ways."

What’s wrong with this statement? Does not answer the question.
Yes Bob, God sure does act all strange-like at times. Honestly, this is a cop out. Why? Because it just states a rather obvious fact with no analysis whatsoever.

Okay, I was reading Letters from the Earth by Mark Twain, when I came across this passage.



Now, I find this interesting. It is not my intention to start a flame war.

Rather, I want to see what the response from believers is to this attack. I would like to see both sides of the issue.

Everything happens for a reason.

God works in mysterious ways.

We all die.

These three, combined with Murphy's Law, account for everything.

But then God is not all powerful. Another Catholic koan, perhaps? ;)

If God chooses not to use His infinite power, that does not mean His power is non-existent.

I think we got a wee bit off topic. The point that Trotskyilvania brought up has pretty much gone uncontested so far. Twain points out that God is responsible for EVERYTHING that goes on in the universe, both atrocities and boons to man. The few semi-answers that were given basicaly amount to the following:

1. "We can't comprehend what is good and bad, cause God is so cool."

What's wrong with this statement? While humans can be pretty damn ignorant, we all have a basic set of morals that we all generaly accept. We agree that murder and rape are bad. We all feel that humans should do unto others as they would wish done unto them. Hell, look at the Ten commandments or Allah's messages. God himself supposedly laid down the law! But Twains critique is that God has violated those very laws he set down. He flooded the earth, obliterating every last human save one family, (whom he wished to repopulate the earth, apperently, God has no problem with incest.) Or his order to kill an entire race of people. The point is: Humans can tell the smell of crap from the smell of roses. We can tell generaly what is moral and what is unethical and according to the Bible's old book God is guilty
of sins far worse than the darkest of human souls. Perhaps thats were sin origonated. After all, we apperently were created in his image. :eek: What? Too soon?

Atheism in a nutshell: Worship of the self. What is your basis for holding God to the same standards as a mere Man? Is it evil for a boy to step on an ant? God does as He does, and we have no right to critique His action, for by doing so we inherently declare ourselves His equal, and hence the Worship of the Self, a particularly vile form of Idolatry in my opinion.

2. "Anything God does is by definition good."
What's wrong with this statement? A lot.
Apperently, Its ok to destroy entire races of people because they don't seem Christian enough! I'll just leave it at that.

Yeah, whatever God says goes, I see nothing wrong with that. We come again to the idea of holding God to the same standards as a man, due to the Philosophy of self-worship. The Lord Giveth and the Lord Taketh away. He created the races, if He wants to destroy one because it is evil, that's His prerogative. It is sheer folly and the height of arrogance to assume that one is so very wise that you are right, and God is wrong.

3. "God works in (insert obscure mystical adj. here) ways."
Whats wrong with this statement? Does not anwser the question.
Yes Bob, God sure does act all strange-like at times. Honestly, this is a cop out. Why? Because it just states a rather obvios fact with no analysis whatsoever.

To comprehend God's point of view is not possible for those such as us. We can only trust that He knows best, and that even if He does something that will never benefit us, He had His reasons. Of course, this is not to say that He causes everything, for it is my belief that God can choose to abandon certain people, individuals, groups or nations, and rather than overtly cause them harm, simply withdraw His protection. Maybe instead of asking "Why do bad things happen to good people?" we should ask "How good are those people really?"

Atheism in a nutshell: Worship of the self. What is your basis for holding God to the same standards as a mere Man? Is it evil for a boy to step on an ant? God does as He does, and we have no right to critique His action, for by doing so we inherently declare ourselves His equal, and hence the Worship of the Self, a particularly vile form of Idolatry in my opinion.


:rolleyes:
Apparently because I don't dismiss genocide in Darfur (Africa has an enormous Catholic population.) means that I worship myself. I do have faith in the near sacred potential of the Human Spirit. As for the the ant question, yes to some extent, it is evil to end another life purly for self indulgence. I hold God not to the same standards, but higher standards as He is toying with truely sentient beings. What he does may be Godly but they are anything but benovlent.


Yeah, whatever God says goes, I see nothing wrong with that. We come again to the idea of holding God to the same standards as a man, due to the Philosophy of self-worship. The Lord Giveth and the Lord Taketh away. He created the races, if He wants to destroy one because it is evil, that's His prerogative. It is sheer folly and the height of arrogance to assume that one is so very wise that you are right, and God is wrong.


You don't see anything wrong with killing billions of men woman and children because they don't adhere to a rigid and archaic moral code built upon the oppression of women? Replace the god God with Hitler and you would make a great Nazi. Also, Why create a race that you know would eventualy abandon you? Wouldn't it be more just and thus moral to not create them in the first place? Personally, I don't think its arrogant to hold God to the standards He supposedly created in the Covenant.


To comprehend God's point of view is not possible for those such as us. We can only trust that He knows best, and that even if He does something that will never benefit us, He had His reasons. Of course, this is not to say that He causes everything, for it is my belief that God can choose to abandon certain people, individuals, groups or nations, and rather than overtly cause them harm, simply withdraw His protection. Maybe instead of asking "Why do bad things happen to good people?" we should ask "How good are those people really?"[/QUOTE]

Apparently, the Bible doesn't reveal any of God's plans... :rolleyes:
Once again I ask you why does God even bother creating a race of people just to abandon them to a world of pain, death and suffering.
Addressing your final observation (one that I find most amusing...)
Let's asume that God withdraws his protection of a young pregnant married Christian and as a result, she is raped and murdered and with her, dies the child. Pray tell, what did that child do to deserve such an un dignified and grusome end. Perhaps you will just hide behind blind faith agian. Let's make personal. I'm fairly sure that if your mother devoped an untreatable cancer, you wouldn't be questioning her morality, but rather pleading to Christ for mercy and that you would pray everynight until death took her. (After all I'm sure she's a good Christian ;))

Atheism in a nutshell: Worship of the self.


Not at all - it is the 'worship' of nothing, even 'self'.


It is sheer folly and the height of arrogance to assume that one is so very wise that you are right, and God is wrong.


On the contrary, from my perspective it is sheer folly to assume one can truly know anything about 'god', since 'god' is a quantity that can never be measured or calculated.

Indeed - a world of six billion people, and hundreds/thousands of different ideas of what 'god' might be...

It is the height of arrogance to assume you have some kind of exclusive grip on truth.

'god' is a quantity that can never be measured or calculated.Is it? How and why do you know?

Is it? How and why do you know?

Because I am a limited human entity, which limits my capacity to ever comprehend something infinite and eternal?

Because our universe is the biggest 'measuring-stick' we have, and the duration of our universe the longest timer... and yet 'god' is supposed to be greater than either?


On the other hand, if you can show me how to count to infinity - maybe we can measure 'god', after all...?

Because I am a limited human entity, which limits my capacity to ever comprehend something infinite and eternal?

Because our universe is the biggest 'measuring-stick' we have, and the duration of our universe the longest timer... and yet 'god' is supposed to be greater than either?

On the other hand, if you can show me how to count to infinity - maybe we can measure 'god', after all...?But who said that god was all that? After all, I understand Q. That's basically what a god is.

Why do so many people who vaguely follow the doctrines of Jesus Christ, such as compassion for the less fortunate, hate Christianity so much? It's funny that such people are universally Americans. Why can't you get it through your heads that Christianity =/= the Republican Party?

I tend to prefer William S. Burroughs' approach to the issue...

"Consider the impasse of a one god universe. He is all-knowing and all-powerful. He can't go anywhere since he is already everywhere. He can't do anything since the act of doing presupposes opposition. His universe is irrevocably thermodynamic having no friction by definition. So he has to create friction. War, fear, sickness, death to keep his dying show on the road... "
This is not logical, and also assumes that God acts like a human.

Why do so many people who vaguely follow the doctrines of Jesus Christ, such as compassion for the less fortunate, hate Christianity so much? It's funny that such people are universally Americans. Why can't you get it through your heads that Christianity =/= the Republican Party?

It's not just America. I come from one of the most Catholic nations on the world. If you're Catholic nobody cares, because chances are that you aren't practising anyway. It's not stupId to believe in moving statues of Mary (there was one near me not too many years ago) or to believe that the magical bread during Mass is actually some of the flesh of Christ (he must have a lot of skin). But if you're a Christian, well then you're totally irrational.

But you should know that it's a worldly default to attack Christianity. Being insulted is part of the Christian package. Besides, doesn't it say in the Beatitudes; Matthew 5:11"Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Hey, I just noticed that you're Irish, too. Sorry, form your post it sounded as if you were American.

But who said that god was all that? After all, I understand Q. That's basically what a god is.

Who says that is what Q is?

You mistake the image for the reality...

How old is Q? How tall? (When Q is 'human' - and, by "Q", I take it you mean one specific aspect of Q...) What is the limit of Q's power? What is the source?

If there are gods, or is a god, it must be something different to what 'we' are... otherwise it is just 'us', not 'god'... and, if it is something different, we can never truly conceive what it is to be that thing. And, if we can't fully empathise, we certainly can't fully understand.

Who says that is what Q is?

You mistake the image for the reality...

How old is Q? How tall? (When Q is 'human' - and, by "Q", I take it you mean one specific aspect of Q...) What is the limit of Q's power? What is the source?

If there are gods, or is a god, it must be something different to what 'we' are... otherwise it is just 'us', not 'god'... and, if it is something different, we can never truly conceive what it is to be that thing. And, if we can't fully empathise, we certainly can't fully understand.Oh yes, you mean like I can never truly conceive what it is to be a dog.

Oh yes, you mean like I can never truly conceive what it is to be a dog.

That is part of it - but at least we are fairly sure of the material boundaries of 'dog'.

Atheism in a nutshell: Worship of the self. What is your basis for holding God to the same standards as a mere Man? Is it evil for a boy to step on an ant? God does as He does, and we have no right to critique His action, for by doing so we inherently declare ourselves His equal, and hence the Worship of the Self, a particularly vile form of Idolatry in my opinion.

You're telling humanists that they "worship" themselves? :confused: What the hell is your problem!? So now your only recourse is to call those who disagree with you sociopaths and narcisists. We have every right to critique the actions of God as they are described in the Bible. I happen to feel that if God does exist, he doesn't resemble anything that is described in that vast volume of lies.

The bible was written by men to justify the oppression of other men, women, children and donkeys (but they had it coming ;)) Furthermore, the morality that God holds humanity to in the bible is the not the morality that he holds himself to. He even goes so far as to violate the Ark of the Covenant!

Yeah, whatever God says goes, I see nothing wrong with that. We come again to the idea of holding God to the same standards as a man, due to the Philosophy of self-worship. The Lord Giveth and the Lord Taketh away. He created the races, if He wants to destroy one because it is evil, that's His prerogative. It is sheer folly and the height of arrogance to assume that one is so very wise that you are right, and God is wrong.

Your God can't even follow his own law. He obliterates billions of people, upon little proof of wrong doing, saves 8 out of millions and tells them to reproduce within the family. And then he allows the Holocaust to occur, where millions of people are killed by a megalomaniac for abitrary reasons.

There is only one word to describe your concept of God: Evil. He reviles evil in men, but then perpetrates the same crimes back on humanity.

To comprehend God's point of view is not possible for those such as us. We can only trust that He knows best, and that even if He does something that will never benefit us, He had His reasons. Of course, this is not to say that He causes everything, for it is my belief that God can choose to abandon certain people, individuals, groups or nations, and rather than overtly cause them harm, simply withdraw His protection. Maybe instead of asking "Why do bad things happen to good people?" we should ask "How good are those people really?"

Then it is impossible to know that he even exists. You say that we cannot comprehend God's point of view, and then you offer what you think it is! This is sheer madness. How good where the jews? What crime could any of them have committed to deserve the death of 6 million of them in horrificly cruel conditions?

Seeing the complete moral bankruptcy of your position, I can only make one conclusion. God as he is described in the Bible cannot exist, and I refuse to make any leap of faith on what God is. My only logical position is agnosticism. I asked for an alternative view on Religious matters so that possibly I wouldn't be so angry at fundamentalist Chrisians. You blew it.

That is part of it - but at least we are fairly sure of the material boundaries of 'dog'.Maybe we would also be fairly sure of the material boundaries of 'god' if we saw one.

Maybe we would also be fairly sure of the material boundaries of 'god' if we saw one.

If we could, indeed.

However, then we would only comprehend the material aspects.

When Zeus is on earth, is he just human - since he is bound in human shape? Or is he always a god... in which case, how much of Zeus can we never measure?

If we could, indeed.

However, then we would only comprehend the material aspects.

When Zeus is on earth, is he just human - since he is bound in human shape? Or is he always a god... in which case, how much of Zeus can we never measure?When Zeus is on earth you can ask him.

Makes me glad to be an atheist. It's so much... simpler.
You don't have to fgure out which diety is the right one. You don't have to figure out what he/she wants in the mostly contradictory holy books. You don't have to worry about pissing him/her off and being smited. Or being smited arbitrarily because you belong to the wrong group.
You don't have to either try to justify his/her wacky and mostly insane actions or just believe that humans are inherently evil and deserve all that smiting. You don't have to worry aboput a torturous enternity if you make the wrong choice about which god is real or don't live up to expectations or are one of those evil homos.

When Zeus is on earth you can ask him.

Nah - since that unfortunate Hera incident, he just won't return my calls.

Like it's my fault they turn the lights out at 9pm on Mt. Olympus...

Ahem...

A SERMON ON ETHICS AND LOVE

One day Mal-2 asked the messenger spirit Saint Gulik to approach the Goddess and request Her presence for some desperate advice. Shortly afterwards the radio came on by itself, and an ethereal female Voice said YES?

"O! Eris! Blessed Mother of Man! Queen of Chaos! Daughter of Discord! Concubine of Confusion! O! Exquisite Lady, I beseech You to lift a heavy burden from my heart!"

WHAT BOTHERS YOU, MAL? YOU DON'T SOUND WELL.

"I am filled with fear and tormented with terrible visions of pain. Everywhere people are hurting one another, the planet is rampant with injustices, whole societies plunder groups of their own people, mothers imprison sons, children perish while brothers war. O, woe."

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THAT, IF IT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO?

"But nobody wants it! Everybody hates it."

OH. WELL, THEN STOP.

At which moment She turned herself into an aspirin commercial and left The Polyfather stranded alone with his species.

When Zeus is on earth you can ask him.

That might take a while.

When Zeus is on earth you can ask him.

Now you are just being silly, when was the last time you had a sensible
response from a swan to any question at all.

You say. How do you know what the Creator wants? Are you his prophet?

No, I am not, at least not in the way which you probably mean. But I have read what His prophets have said.

The flaws in your 'thinking'?

1) If a god exists, it won't necessaily be 'yours'.

2) If 'your' god exists, there is no reason to believe he is the only one.

3) Even if 'your' god is the only one, that still doesn't mean he/she 'created' anything.


So - why obey some set of rules attributed to this entity? When it can't be proved real, or unique, or to be responsible for 'creation'?

Hell - you can't even prove this 'god' fellow has given us anything to obey - you have no evidence outside of one set of books that have been constantly added to for three thousand years...

Twain's commets were aimed at Christianity, so I am speaking about Christianity.

No, I am not, at least not in the way which you probably mean. But I have read what His prophets have said.

How thoughtful of you to respond to this thread. I for one would love it if you could apply your vast knowlage of the Bible to this particular topic as Trotsklvania outlined (and later called you on as you hadn't actually responded to the outlined topic.)

I'm also waiting for Prussisse to respond to my retort. Trotsklvania also seems to want a word... Common, P-dawg! You can't just let my points go unanswered (especially when they comprimise the morality of the position your defending.)