• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A Challenge for those who believe in a loving God

Glaurung

Denizen of Niflheim
Nature isn't good so much as it is a good. Nature is indifferent but that it should exist serves a good.

The processes of nature and animals aren't evil. It's not an evil when a lion preys on a gazelle, nor isn't it an evil when a caterpillar is unfortunate enough to end up as the host of a parasitic wasp. It is nonsensical to project any sense of injustice onto these things, because none of these things are rational. A lion is what it is and will do as lions will do, as will any other animal. You don't condemn a chimp that kills another chimp from a rival troop as a murderer. I'd go so far as to say that very fact that you project 'evil' onto nature suggests that there is a good that transcends nature. Where does this sense that things ought to be different come from? It doesn't make sense unless there is something in us that gives us a sense of ought. And I personally believe that sense of ought to be divine in origin. Nothing else in nature rails against the imperfections of nature, except us, who are created for a destiny beyond this world.

As such humans have a rational principle, we possess intent, we possess moral agency, thus morality is applicable to us. Humans can be meaningfully held to account by both other humans and God. We then (in this sense) are fundamentally separate from this world which doesn't exist to be a perfect deathless place but rather to be an imperfect, indifferent world so that God may use it to bring about an even greater good for our sake.

One such good is that as we see (and sometimes fall victim to) the horrible things in nature it gives us more appreciation for what is good. It also shows us our fragility and our total inability to escape the cold realities of decay and death. We thus have all the more reason to cling to that good that completely transcends this world, that transcends all decay and death, so that when we have done our time in this valley of tears we will all the more see the perfect good of God and how He infinitely surpasses everything we have known in this world.

In short, the world is what it is in all its horribleness because such a world better suits the grand scheme of things as it relates to God's plan for us. God allows this brutal world so that He may bring about an even greater good for us, no matter how may caterpillars that greater good may cost.
 
Last edited:

LukeS

Active Member
Ok, is God the most benevolent to people (or creatures) with congenital insensisivity to pain?

Congenital insensitivity to pain - Wikipedia

Seems like a possible heads I win, tails you loose scenario. If pain, then God is cruel. If no pain, then God is cruel.

Therefore, pain is not really a condition of Gods apparent cruelty? Your mind is already made up whatever the case?

 
Last edited:

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
I am going to describe a scenario in the natural world that makes it extremely difficult for me to believe in the existence of a loving, intervening deity:

A certain species of wasp bores a hole into a caterpillar, and injects it with venom that paralyzes it, yet does not at all numb its sense of pain. The wasp then lays its eggs (up to 80 at a time) inside of the caterpillar, and they gradually hatch and mature, literally eating the caterpillar from the inside out all while it is suffering tremendously yet is powerless to do anything about it (remember it has been paralyzed). This process continues for days until the wasps eventually exit the caterpillar, leaving the caterpillar to live the remainder of its life paralyzed and in excruciating pain until it eventually starves to death after this horrible ordeal.

So, I ask you, how can you reconcile your belief in a benevolent deity with such a horrible natural phenomena? Only an monstrously evil sadist of a god would design a process like this. However, it makes sense if the world is guided by indifferent evolutionary processes. As the great Dawkins has said, nature is not cruel, just pitilessly indifferent.

if there is a god and that god is omnipresent, it isn't possible to intervene without promoting parts of itself above other parts of itself. the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. nature recycles itself; so does the Absolute
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
So you judge a religion by a literal reading of a tiny passage in a scripture ignoring the context (a time of war) and ignoring everything else in that scripture and associated (Hadith) that contradicts that one verse such as the verses that say to return evil with good and thus make a friend of your enemy. Or the many Hadith restating the golden rule.
Dear readers, let's skip up to the top of this page, & read the thread's title.
It's all about a challenge to the concept of a loving god, is it not?
I hereby challenge Islam's god as being among the loving.

Consider that this is a religion with extensive scripture in its uncorrupted book, the holy Koran.
It is supposed to be the exact original & unaltered word in the language of its supreme deity.
(Note too that the translation I cited was of the Koran itself, not the hadiths, which could
be argued to be just the word of man.) This means that I may literally read it to discern
what this god believes, intends, & commands. This cannot be dismissed by excusing the
context, by saying it conflicts with other passages, or by calling the excerpted passage "tiny".
It is the true word of Allah.
To avoid a certain response, scriptures have passages that I find dark and negative. People find whatever will confirm their prejudices so what people often quote says more about them than about the holy book.
And you correctly point out a problem with Islam, ie, that those bent on evil, will find
confirmation in the Koran, its separate messages of peace & justice notwithstanding.
As we see, this can inspire malefactors to greater heights of carnage against the infidel.
I only investigated a few passages from the great many available in that translation
of the Koran. How many others offer such darkness?

In your opinion, is it fair & loving to hideously disfigure & eternally torture combatants
in a war because they are non-believers? Does waging a war against an Islamic
country, even in self defense, require such treatment?
 
Last edited:

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
I am going to describe a scenario in the natural world that makes it extremely difficult for me to believe in the existence of a loving, intervening deity:

A certain species of wasp bores a hole into a caterpillar, and injects it with venom that paralyzes it, yet does not at all numb its sense of pain. The wasp then lays its eggs (up to 80 at a time) inside of the caterpillar, and they gradually hatch and mature, literally eating the caterpillar from the inside out all while it is suffering tremendously yet is powerless to do anything about it (remember it has been paralyzed). This process continues for days until the wasps eventually exit the caterpillar, leaving the caterpillar to live the remainder of its life paralyzed and in excruciating pain until it eventually starves to death after this horrible ordeal.

So, I ask you, how can you reconcile your belief in a benevolent deity with such a horrible natural phenomena? Only an monstrously evil sadist of a god would design a process like this. However, it makes sense if the world is guided by indifferent evolutionary processes. As the great Dawkins has said, nature is not cruel, just pitilessly indifferent.

You may have a problem with a loving deity in a general, non-specific way, but the Christ is intimately familiar with carrying and alleviating pain (not just for persons but for the animal kingdom):

For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
I am going to describe a scenario in the natural world that makes it extremely difficult for me to believe in the existence of a loving, intervening deity:

A certain species of wasp bores a hole into a caterpillar, and injects it with venom that paralyzes it, yet does not at all numb its sense of pain. The wasp then lays its eggs (up to 80 at a time) inside of the caterpillar, and they gradually hatch and mature, literally eating the caterpillar from the inside out all while it is suffering tremendously yet is powerless to do anything about it (remember it has been paralyzed). This process continues for days until the wasps eventually exit the caterpillar, leaving the caterpillar to live the remainder of its life paralyzed and in excruciating pain until it eventually starves to death after this horrible ordeal.

So, I ask you, how can you reconcile your belief in a benevolent deity with such a horrible natural phenomena? Only an monstrously evil sadist of a god would design a process like this. However, it makes sense if the world is guided by indifferent evolutionary processes. As the great Dawkins has said, nature is not cruel, just pitilessly indifferent.

Why is it 'horrible'?
 

Akivah

Well-Known Member
So, I ask you, how can you reconcile your belief in a benevolent deity with such a horrible natural phenomena?

This is a variation on the premise that if G-d allows evil, that this is somehow proof that G-d doesn't exist.

There is not a single place in the Torah where G-d tells us that suffering wouldn't exist, that evil things wouldn't happen, that calamities could be avoided, if the person just believed in G-d. So it's a premise without a (Hebrew) biblical basis.
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
I am going to describe a scenario in the natural world that makes it extremely difficult for me to believe in the existence of a loving, intervening deity:

A certain species of wasp bores a hole into a caterpillar, and injects it with venom that paralyzes it, yet does not at all numb its sense of pain. The wasp then lays its eggs (up to 80 at a time) inside of the caterpillar, and they gradually hatch and mature, literally eating the caterpillar from the inside out all while it is suffering tremendously yet is powerless to do anything about it (remember it has been paralyzed). This process continues for days until the wasps eventually exit the caterpillar, leaving the caterpillar to live the remainder of its life paralyzed and in excruciating pain until it eventually starves to death after this horrible ordeal.

So, I ask you, how can you reconcile your belief in a benevolent deity with such a horrible natural phenomena? Only an monstrously evil sadist of a god would design a process like this. However, it makes sense if the world is guided by indifferent evolutionary processes. As the great Dawkins has said, nature is not cruel, just pitilessly indifferent.

The most important thing to consider about God's plan is that these former things will eventually no longer even be remembered.

The nature of animals will be changed -and they will no longer harm each other, but the present overall situation actually makes the future overall situation possible.

There is a reason God will change their nature later -and has not yet done it.
Part of that reason is to change our nature.

Some say that even plants feel pain -but in that case it is more correct to say that they react to that which is harmful. The caterpillar probably feels pain more like we do -and likely suffers -but does not truly suffer as deeply as we do.
We -have systems and capabilities which make our suffering more extreme than some animals -and more of a consideration to ourselves than any animal.
We are able to consider our own state more deeply.

We are also able to consider the state of everything -whereas a cow or horse would not likely worry about its own future, an afterlife, the extinction of species, war, global warming, etc.

So -pain and suffering are more of a consideration the more they are felt and considered -until the point that there is a desire to completely eradicate pain and suffering.

Whether one believes in God or not, the human experience has produced many with a desire to be good stewards of the earth and beyond -and we are actually nearing the ability to change the nature of animals ourselves.

Now consider the fact that not so long ago, you were essentially an ignorant baby -and now you are concerned about the well-being of all life forms.

You essentially have within you what you believe God should have had -and that is why God has allowed us to experience this temporary situation.

God created angels first -and then men in his image beginning with Adam (not that Adam was the first humanoid on earth) -into perfect situations -but they lacked experience and messed up, rejected God's instruction, etc. -and then God allowed them to experience things going very wrong in order to create a vacuum for that which God can provide, and to make men more Godlike.

Now that there is such a vacuum, it will be filled. Now that we hunger and thirst for righteousness, we will be satisfied.
Now that we are becoming Godlike, we can be made gods.
We can be given extremely powerful bodies and minds -and be entrusted with the universe.

Now consider the fact that any creature can be healed, resurrected -and all memory of pain and suffering can be erased -leaving only the ideal end result -and billions of gods creating throughout the universe in peace and happiness.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The most important thing to consider about God's plan is that these former things will eventually no longer even be remembered.
This raises an interesting question posed in the series, Westworld.
If a sentient being can be forced to feel great pain which won't be remembered, is this moral?
I can see some evil government types finding this an attractive idea. They could torture
people for information, & then wipe their memories. A clean conscience they could have.
I don't like it.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
*raises hand* What evidence do you have that caterpillars have a sense of pain?
Where are you getting the pain and suffering parts from?

Pain aside, one need only touch a caterpillar to prove that they have at least a general sense of feeling. One need also only try and keep a caterpillar from its intended activities (survival) in order to see that that same caterpillar strives to live. Whether or not they feel "pain" as we recognize it is moot at that point. I don't think anyone here would find it "okay" for a person suffering from congenital analgesia/CIP to be repeatedly stabbed, burrowed into, or eaten alive simply because they can't "feel pain."

Once again, there is no need to make excuses for God. If He needs to defend himself, I am quite sure He is free to do so at any time.
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
This raises an interesting question posed in the series, Westworld.
If a sentient being can be forced to feel great pain which won't be remembered, is this moral?
I can see some evil government types finding this an attractive idea. They could torture
people for information, & then wipe their memories. A clean conscience they could have.
I don't like it.

"They" don't care what you like -a conscience is rather inconvenient when in such a business -the things they find attractive and do create one hell of a mess of a future -but that is pretty much the exact opposite of what God is doing.

I will try to explain how later
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
Pain aside, one need only touch a caterpillar to prove that they have at least a general sense of feeling.

A "general sense of feeling" is a far cry from "suffering tremendously", or "excruciating pain", or a "horrible ordeal".

One need also only try and keep a caterpillar from its intended activities (survival) in order to see that that same caterpillar strives to live. Whether or not they feel "pain" as we recognize it is moot at that point.

Not for the sake of this discussion it isn't. The idea that the existence of this kind of suffering rules out the possibility of, "the existence of a loving, intervening deity" is the whole point of the OP.

I don't think anyone here would find it "okay" for a person suffering from congenital analgesia/CIP to be repeatedly stabbed, burrowed into, or eaten alive simply because they can't "feel pain."

Do you read many of the threads here?

Once again, there is no need to make excuses for God.

Uh huh . . . ?

If He needs to defend himself, I am quite sure He is free to do so at any time.

If you're only interested in hearing one perspective on this, maybe you should go read a blog and leave the debate forums for people who, you know, want to engage in a debate (?)
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
"They" don't care what you like -a conscience is rather inconvenient when in such a business -the things they find attractive and do create one hell of a mess of a future -but that is pretty much the exact opposite of what God is doing.
According to the Koran translation I posted, their god is doing far worse.
 

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
According to the Koran translation I posted, their god is doing far worse.
I Cor 3:13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I Cor 3:13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
This is less clear than the text I quoted.
What's your interpretation?
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
This raises an interesting question posed in the series, Westworld.
If a sentient being can be forced to feel great pain which won't be remembered, is this moral?
I can see some evil government types finding this an attractive idea. They could torture
people for information, & then wipe their memories. A clean conscience they could have.
I don't like it.

At least they might not have to deal with PTSD....? Looking on the bright side....
SEVeyesB08_th.gif
 
Top