The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday (page 13)

wearewatchingyouman

MIT Physicist Gerald Scroeder on the science of God. It's an interesting watch. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpl0SsrI8K0

PelicanBeach

Yadda, I wrote "He does not "fail" to act. He chooses not to act as mankind wants him to."

Mankind may want or demand that God act as they want him to but he chooses not to. Why? I'm not like the Watchtower I don't claim to have all the answers.

As for the evil in the world, the man on man evil. Who is responsible for that? Mankind or God? Obviously, most prayers go unanswered. Everyone here with half a brain knows that. Why is that? I cannot tell you with any certainty.

sunny23

"There are lots of books, articles and websites available on those subjects sunny23. Ever heard of Google or Amazon?"yadda

Yea and I have plenty of potentials saved in my cart but I asked to get personal opinions on where best to start by a more knowledgeable person (cofty) than I and that's a wise choice right? And THANK YOU for the suggestions! This is why I joined JWN!

The rest of my posts are aimed to keep on topic of speculating why God would allow suffering if there is one.

cofty

No Sunny I disagree.

If you think it through I'm sure you will see why it is a lousy defense of god.

Try thinking about real suffering instead of the hypothetical suffering much loved of comfortable western christians.

Reflect on the plight of a man I remember from 2004 who had lost his wife and children in the tsunami.

Now what was that you were saying about god having a bet with the devil?

cofty

wearewatchingyouman - Does the video have anything to do with theodicy or natural evil?

sunny23

Not arguing to defend Gods existence. I'm pretending there is a God and then assuming that ALL of those killed in the tsunami will be given a chance at peacfull eternal life and then going from there to see if I can use logic to justify his actions in a manner more effective than that pastor tried as Ibelieve he did lesser of a job at it and if in doing so I feel that there is no adequate or plausible justification I then have to chose to hold that as another point against believing in a God.

cofty

OK Sunny - I'm off to bed.

To be clear the question that has to be addressed is "does the promise of eternal life make suffering morally right?"

Hopefully others will contribute to this as well, I will be back tomorrow. Thanks for the chat.

wearewatchingyouman

Not sure if he covers it in the video, but he does talk about this extensively in various writings. Here is a small blurb from his book "God according tp God"

The same God that told us to choose life (Deut. 30:19) created a world in which earthquakes and

tidal waves, plagues and disease snuff the breath of life from myriads of humans ‐ and animals too ‐ at

times in a span of seconds. Is this the doing of the God about which the Bible teaches? Is God

indifferent to our sufferings? If Devine wisdom convincingly does form the basis of existence, we would

logically expect a perfect world, with no errors, no unjustified tragedy. But, that would depend on how

God’s role in this world is defined. If the world were a Spinoza‐ type creation in which God steps back

after setting in place the finely tuned laws of nature, then there’d be no contradiction. Shouldn’t that

goodness be obvious if God is in charge? Perhaps not. By human logic it is illogical that the reputed

infinite God of the Bible would create a world with such basic flaws. God hides the Divine presence

sufficiently to allow each of us to make our own choices, for better or worse, freely within the confines

of our physical and social landscape, without the specter of a cosmic Force peering over our shoulders,

judging our every act. Though man cannot always even half control his destiny, God has given the reins

of man’s conduct, altogether into his hands. We can only know God by what God does. What God is is

what God does in our temporally and physically limited span of existence.

God created the world with three types of cognition, knowledge, understanding and insight ‐ all

three of which are feminine. Psalm 22 says, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” The very

next Psalm says, “The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.” These two verses in words capture the

frustrations that the Biblical Job must have felt during and even after his unwarranted sufferings. Why

did God abandon him? No Divine explanation was offered, only the assurance by God that God had

never forsaken Job, even though God allowed Job to be subject to horrific punishment. And as proof of

God’s shepherding, God ensured that Job survived those troubles. With the way the God of the Bible

relates to this world, not every ill wind that comes one’s way is sent by God. For all the freedom of

purpose implied in “I will be that which I will be,” God has set ground rules, limits, not only for humans,

but also for Devine behavior.

The God that most skeptics reject, a God with unceasing hands ‐ on control, is simply not the God

of the Bible. The biblical God may enter the fray when the flow of nature and humanity strays too far

from the intended teleological path. In general, however, the running of the universe is not a power

play by God. We and the laws of nature, which are themselves creations of the creator, have a major

role in the scenario.

yadda yadda 2

I'm pretending there is a God and then assuming that ALL of those killed in the tsunami will be given a chance at peacfull eternal life.

Wouldn't that be wonderful if it were true. But it still doesn't answer why God would permit so much evil and suffering in the first place? What kind of morality is that? It's a bit like saying it is morally acceptable for some bystander who has the power to prevent the crime to just stand by and do nothing to stop an old lady from being beaten up, provided that the old ladies injuries are all healed in hospital and she receives a million dollars in compensation from the criminal. Why bother trying to stop any evil and suffering at all if ultimately God's hiddenness is justified by an after-life? "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out" was the mentality behind the inquisitions and crusades.

Think about what 'morality' really means (have you heard of the Euthyphro dilemma? http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/266266/1/The-Euthyphro-Dilemma-as-it-Applies-to-the-Doctrine-of-Atonement#.UsYgItIW3ng. If God is in any way to be believeable and worthy of worship, then humans must be able to comprehend his morality. Are we in God's image or not? His morals must then be understandable to us for his existence to have any real meaning at all. If God's morality is ultimately incomprehensible to us with no theodicy standing up to analysis and is at great odds with natural human morality, then God may as well not exist at all.

yadda yadda 2

The God that most skeptics reject, a God with unceasing hands ‐ on control, is simply not the God

of the Bible. The biblical God may enter the fray when the flow of nature and humanity strays too far

from the intended teleological path.

I enjoyed Professor Schroeder's youtube clip very much, thanks for posting that.

The quote from his book above shows he is really a Deist though (ie, believes in a non-intervening God, but he adds his personal ad-hoc qualifier that God will intervene if things get bad enough down here on earth).

The God of the Bible, and Jesus post-resurrection, are definitely portrayed as 'hands on' divine beings who Christians can have a personal, familial relationship with as a son has with a father, or a brother to a brother.

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

Share this