double personality
If God Truly Cared About People Wouldn't He DO SOMETHING By Now?
by minimus 392 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Lillith26
So basically the issues seems to be that people that DON'T believe in God don't like the fact that he hasn't done anything and are asking people who believe in God why he hasn't, correct?
And when those that believe in God show that don't think its God's "job" to do anythign that we can't do, those that don't believe in God to begine with have issues with a "common sense" answer.
Interesting.
My thoughts exactly- Thankyou PSacramento
Frankiespeakin- We can just skip the big bang theory discussion for a different thread (I have a different view/perspective on that), and if you look closely at my post, you'll see I put 'Deist of sorts'- I dont even hold myself 100% to the few basic common beliefs of that philosophy... just the parts that 'make sense'...
Would I like God to be 'active' and 'intervine'? yep... but I dont expect 'speacial treament' from anyone- this whole universe does not revolve around me and any of my wants... besides who am I to question God? and if I did... how do you I would recieve an answer? I seek for knowledge in the creation itself- as I quoted before,"only a poorly made creation would need constant tinkering with" and do you really think any mere human has enough knowledge and wisdom to ask for changes because they find this creation insufficiant or lacking somehow?????????? We- humans, have enough here at our disposal to make life peacfull for each other.... we just lack that which is preached in every religion/philosophy... do unto others/harm none etc... -
superpunk
So, the bottom line is: who knows?
I think so, yes - if you want to retain a belief in some sort of God, energy, or first cause.
Viewing God as an invention of his authors, his creators, we see so many logical disconnects between the idea that God is good and cares about us, and the reality in the world. This is easily observable by modern man, who has time and the means to think about these things. But that wasn't a problem for the audience that books like the bible were originally intended for. They were intended for savage people who liked the idea that God was on their side and he ordained their murderous ways and even blessed them for being genocidal. They had a very tiny world and the bible's explanations were satisfactory for most of them.
Now we know better. The Orthodoxy figured this out quite some time ago, and realized that if you were going to have faith in God, you were only allowed to question so far - at that point it becomes mandatory for "faith" to take over, and you must be satisfied with the fact that "it's a mystery".
It's a phrase maligned by the Dubs, but IMO it is the ONLY way to maintain a faith in some mystical sky daddy. You can only use your powers of reason in order to conclude that God is good, he loves us, and everything is going to be peachy. If your powers of reason lead anywhere else - suspend them immediately, declare it a mystery, and call it a day.
-
HappyGuy
littlebird,
Do you have children? If so as a father would you want your children to just sit around and do nothing, or would you want them to take steps knowing that every step they take is either for good or evil and all have consequences. God our heavenly father like our earthly father would not want us to take a step in the wrong direction ie take drugs and tells us the evil of it however it is still our choice to take that drug as it is your childs that is free will. We have to choose to take advice and do what we know to be right.
This has what to do with my example, which I will repeat again. A worm lives in the rivers in many third world countries, this worm gets into the human body and causes a disease known as river blindness. Your god could easily fix this problem. There are no steps that humans can take to solve the problem. The worms are not evil, the children who are blinded are not evil, so your bringing up it being man's fault because of their evil does not make any sense.
You still haven't even tried to address my original point. And you still haven't shown me the scriptures that tell us how to avoid the river blindness caused by the worms that your god put in the rivers.
-
HappyGuy
PSacramento
what parasites are you referring to"
Onchocerca volvulus
-
HappyGuy
Happy guy, you are very arrogant and just want to argue. How dare you tell me to educate myself just because I do not agree with your opinions about God.
I'm not arrogant, I just don't like intellectual dishonesty.
I didn't tell you to educate yourself because you don't agree with my opinions about God.
I told you to educate yourself because you tried to put blame for the river blindness disease on the victims by claiming that it is dirty water that causes the paraistes to thrive. Which is absolutely not the case, and if you had actually looked up the river blindness disease instead of just spouting the usual "its all mankind's fault" mantra, you would have known that.
Onchocerca volvulus lives in fast flowing rivers. These rivers are not polluted. Of course you didn't do any reasearch on the point I made or you would have known this.
-
HappyGuy
lovelylil,
Are you really concerned about the parasites in the water?
What I think about this is irrelevent, my point is that your god obviously doesn't care or he would do something about it.
well then what are you doing to help the situation?
Again you attempt to shift the topic of the thread from "If GOD truly cared about people wouldn't He DO SOMETHING by now" to "If HAPPY GUY truley cared about people wouldn't He DO SOMETHING by now". What I have or have not done about the situation is irrelevent to the topic of the thread.
Instead of blaming God because he made the parasite, why don't you try to figure out a way to get rid of it.
Whether I have done so or not is irrelevent to the topic of this thread. God, according to you, is all powerful, yet he allows millions of people to be blinded by a cause that he could easily fix.
And don't you tell me for one second that it is not man's fault the water is not cleaned in some countries because that is total hogwash.
I never said anything about that. I said that the worm in question, Onchocerca volvulus, lives in fast flowing rivers which are not polluted. So, your bringing up your "its all mankind's fault because they pollute the water" is another attempt to shift blame onto the victims.
There are enough financial resources in this world so that ALL PEOPLE should have clean water filtration systems but the fact is that Man does not share his resources equally becuase he is too concerned with himself.
Totally irrelevent since the Onchocerca volvulus cannot be controlled by filtration systems. Since you won't educate yourself on river blindness I will explain it for the benefits of other forum members. The river blindness disase is caused by the bite of the black fly. TheOnchocerca volvulus lives in fast flowing rivers and gets into the black fly, the black fly bites humans and passes Onchocerca volvulus into them. You can filter the water all you want and you won't stop this process. I'm not sure how you use filtration systems on fast flowing rivers though.
Why should some countries posess all the wealth while others are still not developed due to lack of money? If man applied God's standards then some monetary value of all people would go to the poor, remember the gleaning of the fields in the OT and how some of the wheat had to stay in the field so the poor can eat it? Also, how many poor lived under King Solomon's rule?
Totally off topic from the example I gave and totally off topic from the topic of this thread. The river blindness disease does not differentiate between rich and poor.
Any fool can sit back and blame God for all the ills of the world and cry that he is not doing anything.
Again you shift the blame on the victims. And you demonze the messenger. You call me a fool and say I am whining. I merely gave an example of a condition that is not caused by man's "evil" or by man's inability to govern himself, but is caused by the way your god created the black fly and the Onchocerca volvulus, and I pointed out how easy it would be for God to do something about this horiffic disease and that taking such action would not infringe on human's free will, since the behavior of the black fly and the Onchocerca volvulus is totally out of human control, so for God not to act shows that God either does not care, does not notice, or lacks the power to do so. You call me arrogant yet you continuosly insinuate that I sit around "doing nothing" when you know nothing about me or what I do or don't do about suffering in the world. Which is a very arrogant stance to take.
-
littlebird
Happy Guy, seriously, have you been infected by these worms? You seem to be blind to anything I've already explained.
Show me where science or anyone says that human steps cannot stop river worms. Is there science that says there is no insecticide to kill this fly? What about medications to treat it? Personally I think this river worm discussion is off topic.
God WONT personally kill the worms because its OUR responsibility to care for the earth. Read Genesis. The bible doesn't talk about river worms, but it does talk about cleanliness, Read Leviticus, it talks about caring for others, read Matthew. Im not going to give you just a single scripture, you need to read the books in context.
Im sorry you don't like the answers, take it up with God.
-
littlebird
Ok happy guy, that last post may have been a bit testy. I just woke up. Sometimes I feel like you are on the attack, and maybe you just aren't. Hard to tell peoples intentions through the written word.
Possibly we cant always necessarily understand God by what read either. Maybe we don't always understand the intent the bible writers had in some of their writings.
Sometimes I wish God would step in and stop it all, but if he did, he would be picking & choosing. To be fair, he would he would have to take complete controll over everything. How many of us would really want that? You would be forced to love a God, that you maybe you dont. You would be forced to do works for him that you don't want to. Would you be willing to sacrifice your freedom and give complete submission to this God, for the good of the world?
I wish you all peace and I do respect your opinions, and I do try to understand them. Im actually a very open minded person. I hope that if I continue to come to this board that I can receive th same in return.
-
frankiespeakin
Lill,
Frankiespeakin- We can just skip the big bang theory discussion for a different thread (I have a different view/perspective on that), and if you look closely at my post, you'll see I put 'Deist of sorts'- I dont even hold myself 100% to the few basic common beliefs of that philosophy... just the parts that 'make sense'...
You can't do that and make a honest rebuttal:
The reason why I asked you the question I did was because you used the quote of some one who believes in a non intervening God, as a rebuttal to support God lack of involvement in man's affairs:
"I believe that describing God's non-interfence in his creation is just a way for some to put Deism down. Abandonment sounds negetive, as though
the Deist God is indifferent or uncaring. This universe doesnt need intervention. It has everything it needs. Only a poorly-concieved or poorly-made
creation would need to be constanly tinkered with to keep it functioning."- CClendenen.
And so I would conclude that if you use such an rebuttal that you would have to be in agreement with 100% of what was stated to even be able to use it:
""This universe doesnt need intervention. It has everything it needs. Only a poorly-concieved or poorly-made creation would need to be constanly tinkered with to keep it functioning."- CClendenen.""
Now Lill if your not in agreement with the entire statement how can you use it as a rebuttal? you can't just use first part("I believe that describing God's non-interfence in his creation is just a way for some to put Deism down. Abandonment sounds negetive, as though the Deist God is indifferent or uncaring." )and not agree with the second part because they both are integral to each other.
I think if your going to quote someone as a rebuttal you need to really believe what they are saying in context not just a couple of words in a sentence devoid of context.