The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday (page 21)

little_Socrates

We come in the world heralded in by the screams of our moms. Suffering is intrensitic to the human condition from the very beginning. Through most of history it was arguably much worse than it is today. I would say suffering for a human is as comon and normal as water is for a fish. However does the fish ever stop and contemplate "wow I am really wet today?"

Considering all that what gives you the mojo to think you can ask for a suffering free existance? Is a fish ever bothered by the fact that is is wet? Does it ever long for a dry life?

I would argue while we do live in a suffering filled world, we are not "meant" to live in a suffering filled world. We are "meant" for this other life. The simple fact at we are able to long for this other type of life, is proof that it is at least possible.

cofty

Caliber -

1. Why do you think this has anything to do with the good folks of the USA? What a lame chart!

2. The person who wrote that last paragraph is scientifically illiterate.

Earthquakes are not casued by the movement of tectonic plates. Thay are caused by the plate boundaries getting stuck. A creator could very easily have ensured they glide over each other seamlessly with no loss to the planet.

You are now offering incompetence as a defense for god.

cantleave

Caliber - Not sure what to make of your summation regarding plate tectonics. I think you need to revisit the theory. Surely a great designer could have achieved the same thing without the earthquakes and Tsunamis???? I am glad set designers can change scenes smoothly.

Edit - cofty beat me to it.

little_Socrates

in responce to "Tell this rationalization to this suffering person...."

That is the wrong way to look at it. You and I are having a philosophical conversation on these subjects trying to help us understand better.

On the other hand if I was acutally face to face with people from the pictures I would jsut try to help them in any way I could. Me trying rationalise the meaning of suffering with them would do them no good. What they need is some simple human compassion.

cofty

what gives you the mojo to think you can ask for a suffering free existance?

Where has anybody on this thread proposed that any suffering is evidence against theism? I would never make such a purile argument.

Once again you change the subject of the thread to one that you think you can answer. Please stick to the topic.

It is about the failure of theism to deal with natural evil as illustrated by one particular example.

Is a fish ever bothered by the fact that is is wet?

What a strange argument. Every time you try to defend god you make him sound like a monster.

we are not "meant" to live in a suffering filled world

So why did god booby-trap the world with naural disasters?

jgnat

Little Socrates, God is also at the site of the disaster. We may be moved to intervene in the presence of suffering. Why would God not intervene to prevent it in the first place? Is it as Caliber suggests a matter of percentages and simply not big enough to warrant Godlike intervention (distressingly impersonal?)

cofty

That is the wrong way to look at it. You and I are having a philosophical conversation on these subjects trying to help us understand better.

No, you are trying to aplogise for god while behaving as if suffering was only theoretical.

I am discussing the reality of suffering and the abject failure of theism to provide a reasonable answer.

Get out your safe, self-satisfied, propserous, western-evangelical-protestant, ivory tower.

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

Share this