by cofty 2596 Replies latest jw experiences
Kate if any of my rebuttals seem "ambiguous and vague" then you need to go to the summary, choose a point and explain specifically why it doesn't work.
Tammy and Strypes are trying to distract attention from the point by trite preaching. Please don't contribute to their dishonest efforts.
Kate if your answer is that god didn't act because he is a heartless bastard then thank you for your answer. Your only dilemma is how you ought to respond to a celestial tyrant but that is another thread
5. Answers that try to reject the question
For example...
Who are we to judge god?
God can do whatever he chooses
We just need to trust that whatever god does is for the best.Rational Response...
This answer requires that we unhitch the word "love" from any meaningful definition. We may think we know what love means but god demonstrates that we have not the slightest idea. Love could just as easily mean the capricious annihilation of a quarter of a million innocent people. It destroys our ability to make moral judgements. "Good" is whatever pleases god from moment to moment. Mass destruction is just as morally good as altruism and self-sacrifice.If god is love, everything he does must be motivated by love, even when he judges. Love is not a hat he can take off for a while and replace with one labelled "vengeance".
Ethics become a matter of divine fiat and the value of human life is trivialised. This defence reduces god to a celestial Pol Pot who may choose on a whim to eradicate our lives in the manner of the killing fields of Cambodia.
If neglecting to stop a wave that drowns a quarter of a million people doesn't give us pause to reconsider the wisdom of blindly trusting of god what would??
In my veiw, I feel this is misleading and you call me for being off topic if I call you on you assumption of...........
If god is love, everything he does must be motivated by love, even when he judges. Love is not a hat he can take off for a while and replace with one labelled "vengeance".-cofty
You are being abiguous in addressing the fact you are denouncing God's existence because he is not loving. Reading between the lines that is exactly what you are saying, without actually saying it, it is a vague pronouncement.
The following IMO is a statement not a question although you have two question marks to end your statement.......
If neglecting to stop a wave that drowns a quarter of a million people doesn't give us pause to reconsider the wisdom of blindly trusting of god what would??-cofty
This is being vague about what you are really saying here cofty.
I believe God exists. I do not believe God is love, I do not pause to reconsider anything about God at this point as I don't have all the facts. This tradgedy does not stop my enquiry into God's personality and reason's for behaving in such an indifferent manner. But you will say my response is "off topic", I am afraid I disagree, I feel my response is spot on topic as it will ever be.
Kate xx
Kate if your answer is that god didn't act because he is a heartless bastard then thank you for your answer.-cofty
You are putting words into my mouth and then tell me I'm off topic agian. I can't win with your rules cofty.
I am not saying that an unloving god does not exist.
The god of christian theism is loving by definition. My question is about how to reconcile this god with the events of 2004
Ahh so you think I am off topic then do you? I am not sure as your post seems a little abiguous and vague to me.
My question is why can't you discuss God? Why do you need to define specifically the God you wish to discuss and then call me for being "off topic" again cofty?
I am not saying that an unloving god does not exist.-cofty
Oh really, so you beleive in God now??????????????? You are a self labeled atheist cofty. Yes of course you are saying a God of any kind does not exist, hahaha! I rest my case. I am on topic mister.
Kate xx
Oh really, so you beleive in God now???????????????
this is just facile Kate - it makes debating with you tedious.
cofty lacks belief in any definition of god - to qualify all of his own comments with that would make for tiresome repetition.
Thanks for your opinion besty, I agree this whole thread is begining to be tiresome repitition. 56 pages of the same old same old. Indeed I agree with you besty.
Kate xx
P.S. I have sent you an email
Kate IMO it has been a very useful thread 22000 views suggests that others agree.
It is a huge dilemma for christian theists even for the ones who lack the honesty to admit it or the wit to perceive it.
You are not a theist so you have other issues.
If somebody started a thread about knitting it would be churlish to complain that it excludes people who crochet.
