Don't try and say your omnimax god has a reason to allow suffering

[richardlowellt]

All these natural phenomena is not some god conspiring to kill you HEHEHE.... its part of the earths processes.

Some would argue....if god knew what he was doing, he would not have created a bunch of wining, fault finding, rebellious, obstinate, and stiff-necked people. But he did. I dont know how he copes.

Frankly if i was god, i would probably be less patient with the winers.

And again...we can only sit here and speculate about what a loving god is suppose to have done, but you cant define love, you dont get the right to do that. He does.

If we think he is evil and not loving to allow suffering, then will we think he is loving if he gets rid of the people that cause it? No. And so we back to square one.

God never created us to tell him what to do. If he needed an adviser he would not have been god. However we are pretty much in need of help on this planet, and the small time 'gods' on this planet just cant seem to get it together. All the while pointing the finger up to heaven and blaming god for their inability to do a better job. If god did actually come and interfere some folk would ask him to but out. There is more money to be made in making cars than in getting rid of them. God will never be able to satisfy anybody who wants to be god themselves.

If the creation trades the glory of god for the creature they go into a kind of odd mode. When they get obsessed with themselves and set themselves up as their god, they are constantly looking for the bling bling, the fame, the fortune, the name, the glory, the power, the authority, that would make them look on the outside what they think they are on the inside. God. And all these things cause suffering. The ones with power rule. What the one with the biggest gun says is ok, is. And this causes suffering. So really god needs to get rid of any creature that is trying to be god.

Heneni

The point is, it DOESN'T HAVE TO BE APART OF THE EARTHS PROCESS. Why put your most prized creations purposely, into a life threatening environment?

 

[richardlowellt]

Richard. For the time being...just press the quote button. Dont alter anything in the post and at the bottem of the post, where you see
[ / quote ] start typing after that.

At the moment it looks like what you are saying is what i am saying...

And how do I respond to the points in each individual sentence?

 

[Heneni]

The point is, it DOESN'T HAVE TO BE APART OF THE EARTHS PROCESS. Why put your most prized creations purposely, into a life threatening environment?

So you think god screwed up by creating a earth that sustains herself and at the same time puts us at risk.

Yeh ok.

By the same token god did not have to create humans to screw up the planet and hurt her. But he did.

Why do we get to be 'superior'.

Heneni

 

[richardlowellt]

So you think god screwed up by creating a earth that sustains herself and at the same time puts us at risk.

Yeh ok.

By the same token god did not have to create humans to screw up the planet and hurt her. But he did.

Why do we get to be 'superior'.

Heneni

The planet will survive humans, it has survived for millions of years, we have only been here a few hundred thousand, the earth will still be here long after we have gone, she will repair herself and continue until our sun uses up its fuel and explodes. We are no more that fleas on a dog to mother earth, do you think maybe that Aids is her response to our minor irritation of her?

We get "superior" because we have the biggest brains.

And exactly what do you mean when you say "the earth sustains herself"

 

[Vasilisa Jade]

Okay I tried to go through the whole thread, but I kept building up multi-quotes. I wasn't going to participate at first, but I got all these dam multi-quotes... lol

Firstly, I don't believe in an omnimax God, but I do wish to understand this concept and parodox.

Jeezus these quotes are going to be hard to organize into category...

One could say that without pain and suffering there is little value or meaning in happiness and pleasure. But with the way life has developed here on Earth, suffering is inevitable. I have more problems with the people who claim to have been healed by god or by miracles. If there is not anyone helping the thousands of young kids that starve to death every day, I really doubt that a god is helping anyone at all and I think it's arrogant to claim so.

Fact of the matter is, life wouldn't be the way it is if there was no suffering. The avoidance of pain and suffering is what drives a lot of the things we do, and is a reason we exist.

Humans aren't "bad."

However, much of human suffering is our own fault; therefore it is our responsibility to mend it.

Besides, if God just simply removed suffering from the world, what then? Not to mention, how would he do so, and would the method of doing so be "good?"

This is one of the big philosophical points that have been going back in forth in argument for forever. I don't remember the name of the philosophers, but the argument went something like...

"If God is all good why did he create evil, (including suffering which evil causes)?"

"Evil must be present to recognize good."

"Okay... but why so MUCH evil? It would only take a small amount to make the good recognizable."

And that was where they were stumped.

But ya know... that brings about another even more basic version of the OP's original question:

How could evil be created by something all good???

If the being was all good... there would have been no evil present... so where did it come from?

Really? Well, i just took a great big piece of God a moment ago that almost clogged my toilet. Oh, sorry. My porcelain shaped piece of God that I defacate into.

If you're trying to offend me, it's not going to work, because what you've just said falls completely within my beliefs; feces are part of God, as are toilets.

Not trying to offend. Was making a joke, though I was probably more than a little unfair there. While it seems counterintuitive, if God is "everything" then there's really not much to Him. He can have no seperate intentionality or consciousness.

So...what's the point of calling everything "God" instead of just calling it "everything"?

I think I understand RiverWolfs concept of one-ness, and might be able to explain it better if I am understanding it correctly. It seems your belief is similar to the Hindu concept of Brahman.

Think of the world made out of paint. The trees, you, the lakes, the sky, the animals, the gods... all a living painting. That paint would be Brahman - God.

It is like a divine substance that is the makeup of everything and connects everything. When you become one with God you realize your true nature and are absorbed into it.

A more scientific way of looking at the concept that I like is to think of two people holding hands and one touching a tree and one with thier foot in a lake. If you take a high powered microscope and start at one end and move from the tree to the lake, in the most basic form it is all atoms. It is one substance which we are all made from which connects us all. That is how Hindu's understand Brahman and it sounds similar to how RiverWolf understands God.

So....... basically you mean "suffering" is a desire to change something that is out of your control?

I like the Buddhist concept of suffering. Why don't you guys just make it simple and use that?

To live means to suffer, because the human nature is not perfect and neither is the world we live in. During our lifetime, we inevitably have to endure physical suffering such as pain, sickness, injury, tiredness, old age, and eventually death; and we have to endure psychological suffering like sadness, fear, frustration, disappointment, and depression. Although there are different degrees of suffering and there are also positive experiences in life that we perceive as the opposite of suffering, such as ease, comfort and happiness, life in its totality is imperfect and incomplete, because our world is subject to impermanence. This means we are never able to keep permanently what we strive for, and just as happy moments pass by, we ourselves and our loved ones will pass away one day, too.

-The First Noble Truth

Add to that baby rapes, butt rapes, rotting to death slowly cause you have no money or hospitals, watching your baby get burned or drowned cause your culture is psycho and other various forms of torture and atrocities.

You missed the part where someone comes along late in the thread and criticizes everyone for being unoriginal.

To be fair, how many threads do you actually read here where people change their opinions? Have you changed any of yours while on RF? I don't mean during the time you've been posting here, but actually the moment you read something here?

Sure did. I think I admitted it a few times too... That's why I love this place so much. I have evolved a great deal since the first thread I read, and I believe I have a lot more evolving to do and it will never stop.

God allows bad things to happen as retribution for man's continuing move toward independent thought. Details to come.

Exactly. The omnimax God does not desire independant thought in His minions and is not all good after all. Maybe mostly good.... or good intentions... but there's a little evil in there.
​

An all-powerful god has no need for retribution. If he wanted us to think independently he could make it happen without the suffering. Remember, and I can't repeat this enough: he makes the rules. That's why all arguments in favor of an omnimax god will always fail.

If there were an omnimax god, by this logic, there would only be one religion would there not? To an omnimax god, worhipping another would not be acceptable. We would be monotheistic slaves at the waive of a finger. Why wait to punish in the afterlife when you can save yourself the trouble and have minions now? Unless the punishment is too much fun?
​

 

[McBell]

The planet will survive humans, it has survived for millions of years, we have only been here a few hundred thousand, the earth will still be here long after we have gone, she will repair herself and continue until our sun uses up its fuel and explodes. We are no more that fleas on a dog to mother earth, do you think maybe that Aids is her response to our minor irritation of her?

One might conclude from this that perhaps we (humans) are not the reason for the planet Earth being here.....

 

[Willamena]

One might conclude from this that perhaps we (humans) are not the reason for the planet Earth being here.....

Go figure.

 

[richardlowellt]

One might conclude from this that perhaps we (humans) are not the reason for the planet Earth being here.....

Very good, I agree.

 

[Heneni]

The planet will survive humans, it has survived for millions of years, we have only been here a few hundred thousand, the earth will still be here long after we have gone, she will repair herself and continue until our sun uses up its fuel and explodes. We are no more that fleas on a dog to mother earth, do you think maybe that Aids is her response to our minor irritation of her?

We get "superior" because we have the biggest brains.

And exactly what do you mean when you say "the earth sustains herself"

I dont quite agree of course that we cant destroy this planet, i think we are quite capable of doing it. Slowly. But i think if enough nations get 'trigger' earth could be a dead duck in no time.

If we are superior because we have the biggest brains then brains say dont life on a vault. Brains in the end is no match to power. In the end mother earth might not have a brain, but her power overrules us all. Smart would be to accept that and try to adapt. We have survival instincts for a reason. Not to play dice with nature.

In my opinion , really, mother earth is superior in a way. Because without her what are we going to eat? How would we have seasons, how would we have water....?????? But ok in terms of the food chain we are superior and in terms of brain power we are superior. But really in terms of celestial beings we are just a tad bit above beasts. So in terms of spiritual rank, we are pretty much at the bottom.

How does mother earth sustain herself. With things like the nitrogen cycle, the water cycle....things like that.

Heneni

 

[richardlowellt]

I dont quite agree of course that we cant destroy this planet, i think we are quite capable of doing it. Slowly. But i think if enough nations get 'trigger' earth could be a dead duck in no time.

If we are superior because we have the biggest brains then brains say dont life on a vault. Brains in the end is no match to power. In the end mother earth might not have a brain, but her power overrules us all. Smart would be to accept that and try to adapt. We have survival instincts for a reason. Not to play dice with nature.

In my opinion , really, mother earth is superior in a way. Because without her what are we going to eat? How would we have seasons, how would we have water....?????? But ok in terms of the food chain we are superior and in terms of brain power we are superior. But really in terms of celestial beings we are just a tad bit above beasts. So in terms of spiritual rank, we are pretty much at the bottom.

How does mother earth sustain herself. With things like the nitrogen cycle, the water cycle....things like that.

Heneni

You said, "an earth that sustains herself and puts us at risk" how does the nitrogen and water cycle put us at risk?

Earth will survive anything that man can expose her to, she has survived meteor impacts that wiped out almost all life on the planet, massive volcanic eruptions that plunged most of the globe into darkness, ice ages that gouged and scared her with huge canyons and mountain ranges, I'm sure she can survive anything we can throw at her.

 

[Vasilisa Jade]

Oh my goodness this went way off topic.

Tootles.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I figure it had the same relevance as your response.

You either gave it no thought or figured wrong. To limit God to only one characteristic is to try and limit all of whom God is.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

You either gave it no thought or figured wrong. To limit God to only one characteristic is to try and limit all of whom God is.

Nobody said god had only one characteristic though.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Nobody said god had only one characteristic though.

To try and say that God is a loving God cannot cancel His other atributes. Being just may require that He not always show mercy. Some deem this to be not loving. It's not the case. They just misunderstand all of the atributes of God.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

To try and say that God is a loving God cannot cancel His other atributes. Being just may require that He not always show mercy. Some deem this to be not loving. It's not the case. They just misunderstand all of the atributes of God.

Sounds to me like this is a misunderstanding of the inevitable result of taking the combination of omnipotence and omnibenevolence to its logical conclusion.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Sounds to me like this is a misunderstanding of the inevitable result of taking the combination of omnipotence and omnibenevolence to its logical conclusion.

I guess it comes down to whose definitions you use.

 

[McBell]

I guess it comes down to whose definitions you use.

IMHO, you are exactly correct.

 

[McBell]

And it's true. If he's all-powerful, he could. If he's also all-loving, he would.

and yet more opinion that you present as fact.

Nice circle jerk you got going here.

 

[imaginaryme]

What brains? A race of beings supposedly with the conceptual computational power to toss around words like "omniscient and omnipotent" as if such things were common knowledge, yet still cannot see past mere byproducts like suffering and evil?

Two simple concepts the cure the blues. One. Time dilation. Two. The typical mind fallacy. That should cover it.

We're not at the top of the food chain because we're smart or tough. We're at the top because we're aware of ourselves, yet we are still able work together. And all this lovey-dovey talk about mother earth may sound silly down the line, we find out it is just a chrysalis - for us.