Explain this logically christians....

[Kathryn]

waitasec - I'll answer questions if you do. But I won't engage in a one sided conversation where one person fires all the questions and won't answer any in return.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We have a limited human perspective. Sheeze, I've already covered this extensively in this thread and I really don't intend to hash it out again. In fact, sorry - I just won't. If you're interested, scroll back through the posts and read what I've already posted. If you're not that interested, I can't say that I blame you - but...then I'm also not that interested in repeating myself.

I don't think you've addressed my point. There are two choices here:

- we recognize our limited human perspective and follow God's lead. We decide that a young family dying in a car crash is a good thing, even if we can't see how. God treats it as okay, so we can trust in his wisdom and treat it as okay, too.

- we acknowledge that even our limited human perspective is sufficient to say that a young family dying in a car crash is a bad thing and should be prevented if possible. This then allows us to conclude that God should have prevented the crash if he was able.

There's no logically consistent option that allows us to conclude that letting a young family die in a car crash is a good thing when God does it but a bad thing when we do it.

Whether you want to argue that it's good or bad, there are problematic implications.

 

[Kathryn]

There is nothing in your posts that would justify the belief that what we interpret as tragedies are anything other than that. The only thing you've done is repeated your unfounded position as you've done countless times in this thread. Sheeze...

Then please excuse yourself from reading and responding to my posts. I'll support your decision to do so.

 

[waitasec]

Have you read the entire thread? I've explained myself in great detail throughout it.

I'm not unsympathetic. In fact, I do a lot of volunteer work with various groups of people who have experienced great hardship in life BECAUSE I am empathetic to their losses. I have such empathy because I've EXPERIENCED great losses myself - and learned that I can survive them.

I hope to be able to impart what I've learned to others and help them survive as well. It may surprise you, but I'm actually sought out as a source of strength and counsel within my community.

One step toward emotional health after loss (not the first step but definitely ONE step) is to put our experiences into perspective - into the perspective of our own lives as a whole, and also the human experience as a whole.

this isn't about you...
this is about the idea of a benevolent god which has proven itself as a fallacy given the indifference we are surrounded in.

 

[Kathryn]

I don't think you've addressed my point. There are two choices here:

- we recognize our limited human perspective and follow God's lead. We decide that a young family dying in a car crash is a good thing, even if we can't see how. God treats it as okay, so we can trust in his wisdom and treat it as okay, too.

- we acknowledge that even our limited human perspective is sufficient to say that a young family dying in a car crash is a bad thing and should be prevented if possible. This then allows us to conclude that God should have prevented the crash if he was able.

There's no logically consistent option that allows us to conclude that letting a young family die in a car crash is a good thing when God does it but a bad thing when we do it.

Whether you want to argue that it's good or bad, there are problematic implications.

See, I don't agree that there are just two choices. That's your limited perspective, not mine.

The third option is that it is part of God's plan that we live in a temporarily flawed world, but that this flawed world will be made perfect and whole in His time- and He doesn't have to answer to us about His timing. He is omnipotent and we are not.

 

[waitasec]

We have a limited human perspective. Sheeze

That's your limited perspective, not mine.

so, who has the limited perspective?

 

[Kathryn]

this isn't about you...
this is about the idea of a benevolent god which has proven itself as a fallacy given the indifference we are surrounded in.

It is about me - and about you and everyone else.

It's about how we assimilate what we see as negative events in our lives and in the lives of others.

You don't believe in God - you don't feel He has proven Himself to you.

I don't share your view or beliefs. God has proven Himself to me over and over again.

I believe we're at an impasse. And sorry, but on this note, I am going to bed. If you come up with a compelling enough argument, I may respond to it tomorrow, but right now my comfortable bed with my comfortable husband inside of it are both calling me.

 

[Commoner]

Then please excuse yourself from reading and responding to my posts. I'll support your decision to do so.

Is that more sarcasm, Kathryn? Have you developed a taste for it?

 

[waitasec]

S
The third option is that it is part of God's plan that we live in a temporarily flawed world, but that this flawed world will be made perfect and whole in His time- and He doesn't have to answer to us about His timing. He is omnipotent and we are not.

and you know god's plan.... how exactly?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

See, I don't agree that there are just two choices. That's your limited perspective, not mine.

There's a spectrum:

- a young family dying in a car crash is a good thing.
- it's a bad thing
- it's somewhere in between.

The third option is that it is part of God's plan that we live in a temporarily flawed world, but that this flawed world will be made perfect and whole in His time- and He doesn't have to answer to us about His timing. He is omnipotent and we are not.

That's the answer God gives in Job, but it doesn't really address the issue.

If it helps to make the world perfect when a human being saves a young family from dying in a car crash, then it helps to make the world perfect when a young family is saved from dying in a car crash.

If morality means anything, then there can't be one standard for God and one for us.

Also, there's another problematic issue for Christianity: judgement. If our sense of right and wrong is so out of whack that we could consider the actions of a perfectly good God to be evil, then how could it be just to hold us culpable for decisions based on this faulty moral sense of ours? The idea that we could be justly judged for sin implies that we can tell right from wrong.

 

[waitasec]

It is about me - and about you and everyone else.

It's about how we assimilate what we see as negative events in our lives and in the lives of others.

You don't believe in God - you don't feel He has proven Himself to you.

I don't share your view or beliefs. God has proven Himself to me over and over again.

I believe we're at an impasse. And sorry, but on this note, I am going to bed. If you come up with a compelling enough argument, I may respond to it tomorrow, but right now my comfortable bed with my comfortable husband inside of it are both calling me.

this is why it is so difficult to debate these theocratic ideologies with someone who believes they have a relationship with a divine being...

i don't want to make this personal...
these are just ideas floating around and we're figuring out if these ideas stick or not, which ones make sense. it's hard to kick around ideas when it gets personal...do you see what i mean.

so please would you please put on some fresh dry socks?

 

[Thesavorofpan]

Well if that's the case then turning to friends and family who actually CARE about things in my life are the ones I want in it. If god is just "doing his job" without really thinking about how one would feel, then that would be just another reason no to turn to him. Thankfully I'm not one who does believe in a fairy tale being.

But people turn to psychologist who are paid to care? Is that any worse?

 

[ninerbuff]

But - everyone dies. So all we're really doing is quibbling about how and when.

People can make a choice to be safe and live longer, commit suicide or live extreme (base jump, stunt person, tight rope walker). The ones who live extreme have a higher chance of death than someone who doesn't participate. That's why insurance companies charge them a higher rate. Same with people who don't take care of their health. So there is some choice.
When taken by someone like a drunk driver or random act of violence, choice is taken out of the decision.

 

[ninerbuff]

Didn't Adam choose independence from God by disobeying God?
Adam rejected God's way of ruling.
Adam set up people rule over God rule.

Adam made the choice to disobey. God warned Adam in advance that disobedience would lead to trouble for mankind.

Because of Satan and Adam, as far as God's sovereignty, Job 9v24 says the earth is given into the hand of the wicked... See Genesis 3 vs23,24.

Mankind's history have proven God's words to be true.
Mankind can't even succeed in restoring Eden to earth yet alone direct his step successfully as Jeremiah 10v23; 17v9 shows.

That is why we need God to step in, and by means of Christ Jesus he will.
Jesus will separate the humble meek sheep-like people from the wicked.
Matthew 25 vs31,32 ;Psalm 92v7; Rev 19 vs11,14,15; Isaiah 11v4.

We are fast approaching the 'final signal', so to speak, of 1st Thess 5vs2,3 when 'they' [the political powers that be] will be saying 'Peace and Safety' or 'Peace and Security' as a precursor to the great tribulation of Matt 24v21 before Jesus ushers in Peace on Earth toward men of goodwill thus vindicating God's sovereignty, God's universal sovereignty.
-Matt 24v14

Nice story, but first you have to prove that this adam existed and that I even related by DNA.

 

[ninerbuff]

Needless death? What's your alternative? Are you saying people shouldnt' die?

Well wouldn't it be better if people died of old age rather than tragedy? It's still death, just that life is prolonged.

 

[OneThatGotAway]

A close friend informed me today that his cousin lost his wife and 2 kids to a drunk driver a few days ago. Now the cousin is being asked to "lean on god" and "faith" to make it through it. So explain that if it was god's "plan" to take his family away, then why lean on god for support? How does that logically make sense?

Many people seem to forget that God's Plan of Salvation for Mankind has not come yet. Ever since the Aedam rebelled against God in the Garden, God has set out a Restoration Plan that will take at least 7,000 years to complete. Because that is the only way that all of mankind will know that God is the only capable of being God. :bow:

To this day, there are people on this earth who wants to play god; including the drunk driver that used his powers to harm a wife and her children. The drunk driver killed them not God; God allowed it to happen, because the sons of Aedam have not finished playing "god". Until then, the victims can take comfort in and trust that the Almighty God will RESTORE the Paradise of the Garden once earth is removed of ALL EVIL people. Why rush a perfect plan?

 

[Copernicus]

Many people seem to forget that God's Plan of Salvation for Mankind has not come yet. Ever since the Aedam rebelled against God in the Garden, God has set out a Restoration Plan that will take at least 7,000 years to complete. Because that is the only way that all of mankind will know that God is the only capable of being God. :bow:

The only way? I can think of lots of better ways than that, and I'm not even omniscient. Nobody here has forgotten the biblical myth of Genesis, but most of us do not believe it. Why should we? It's not the only creation myth that people have ever made up.

To this day, there are people on this earth who wants to play god; including the drunk driver that used his powers to harm a wife and her children...

I have seen lots of religious people try on God's shoes. They try to imagine what God would do when faced with the recalcitrant sinful human race that he created. That truck driver. He was just a drunk. No matter how wrong the man's choice to drink and drive was, the question here is not about him. It is about the victims, who had no choice at all in the matter.

The drunk driver killed them not God; God allowed it to happen, because the sons of Aedam have not finished playing "god". Until then, the victims can take comfort in and trust that the Almighty God will RESTORE the Paradise of the Garden once earth is removed of ALL EVIL people. Why rush a perfect plan?

If there were not people who thought like this, atheists would not make such a big deal about what a tyrant the God of the Old Testament was. But you really take all that stuff literally. Human beings used to commit horrible atrocities. We read about those in the Bible, and we read that God approved some of those atrocities. After all, a primitive tribe that had just slaughtered its rivals would naturally record the event as sanctioned by their deity. In this case, you approve of the logic of punishing offspring and descendants for sins that they did not personally commit, even if you can come to believe that something so innocuous as Adam and Eve's "sin" merited God's wrath, especially since he knew they were going to disobey his command in the first place. Any way you try to spin that story, God comes off as more evil than his creations, yet you still believe it.

 

[Kathryn]

and you know god's plan.... how exactly?

I never said I know God's plan. But I believe that God HAS a plan.

 

[Kathryn]

There's a spectrum:

- a young family dying in a car crash is a good thing.
- it's a bad thing
- it's somewhere in between.

This idea of a spectrum is just your idea. For one thing, a family dying in an accident is not a THING - it's an event. Events are all entertwined - such as, if I hadn't dropped that jar of mayonnaise on my kitchen floor, I would have left the house twenty minutes earlier, right? Maybe or maybe not. If I had, would I have been on the road at exactly the same moment an 18 wheeler veered over into my lane? But if I had left earlier, would I have missed meeting my future husband in the produce aisle at the grocery store?

See, you can't play all this "what if" stuff, because it's nothing more than a mind game. There is no "what might have been." There is only "what is." If you play the What If game - the family lives. But maybe they live only to be kidnapped by pirates off the coast of Equitorial Guinea and they are beheaded and the video is all over the internet. Maybe the girl grows up to be a psycho and kills her five children by drowning them in the bathtub. Who knows?

So we only have WHAT IS. And Christians believe this:

Romans 8:28
28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who[a] have been called according to his purpose.

All things which happen aren't pleasant, or peaceful, or fun. But all things which happen are part of a larger plan. That's what Christians believe. And we believe that when things happen, it is our responsibility to be receptive to God's will, and to find our role in that plan and accept it and act in a way which glorifies God by helping others when possible.

That's the answer God gives in Job, but it doesn't really address the issue.

It DOES address the issue - you're just not accepting the answer. And that's OK - that's your choice. My choice differs.

If morality means anything, then there can't be one standard for God and one for us.

It's not that God has a different standard of morality - the problem is that we try to place our own limited perspective and understanding on these issues. Like my earlier example of me dragging my dog to the vet so that the vet can cut her open and take organs out of her and stick her with sharp instruments. I am sure my dog wonders how and why I do this to her when I profess to love her so much. She cannot understand the whole picture.

Also, there's another problematic issue for Christianity: judgement. If our sense of right and wrong is so out of whack that we could consider the actions of a perfectly good God to be evil, then how could it be just to hold us culpable for decisions based on this faulty moral sense of ours? The idea that we could be justly judged for sin implies that we can tell right from wrong.

Of course we can tell right from wrong - but we have to work with the information we have at hand. God has more information than we do.

 

[Kathryn]

People can make a choice to be safe and live longer, commit suicide or live extreme (base jump, stunt person, tight rope walker). The ones who live extreme have a higher chance of death than someone who doesn't participate. That's why insurance companies charge them a higher rate. Same with people who don't take care of their health. So there is some choice.
When taken by someone like a drunk driver or random act of violence, choice is taken out of the decision.

Sorry - but the chances of death are one hundred percent. Like I sais, you're still only quibbling about when and how.

Insurance companies know this - they're not counting on you not dying. If that were the case, they'd issue the same policy at the same price for a ninety year old as they do a twenty year old - as long as neither party was involved in sky diving and were non smokers.