I Can Not Respect A God who Allows Children to Suffer

[Peacewise]

i've posted why I consider the argument valid in an edit above.

 

[McBell]

i've posted why I consider the argument valid in an edit above.

And it is rejected on the grounds that there is not a single parent on the planet that comes even close to the alleged Omni-ness of god.

Nice try though.

Now if you were to have a parent that intentionally gave their child a painful life threatening disease and then sat around and did absolutely nothing for them, THEN you would have a comparable analogy.

But something tells me that you would not present it for it would not help your argument.

 

[Peacewise]

And it is rejected on the grounds that there is not a single parent on the planet that comes even close to the alleged Omni-ness of god.

Nice try though.

I claim that a parent has absolute say over their child playing a contact sport and that this is a reasonable analogy for the omni-ness of god.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

I claim that a parent has absolute say over their child playing a contact sport and that this is a reasonable analogy for the omni-ness of god.

No...it isn't.

 

[McBell]

I claim that a parent has absolute say over their child playing a contact sport and that this is a reasonable analogy for the omni-ness of god.

You can claim it all you want.
The fact is that it is just not true.
Unless you are also going to claim that the parent has absolute foreknowledge on what is going to happen.
Are you going to make that claim as well?
Or that the parent has absolute power to prevent any injury anyway.
Are you going to claim that?

Like I said.


Fail

 

[Peacewise]

Ok, The_Evelyonian we disagree.

 

[Peacewise]

You can claim it all you want.
The fact is that it is just not true.
Unless you are also going to claim that the parent has absolute foreknowledge on what is going to happen.
Are you going to make that claim as well?
Or that the parent has absolute power to prevent any injury anyway.
Are you going to claim that?

Like I said.


Fail

I do claim that a parent does have foreknowledge that an injury is likely to occur during contact sport. Often the parent will have played that sport themselves and are intimately aware of the known fact that contact sport produces injuries, or if they haven't played it then they have probably seen the sport on the tv or otherwise and are aware that injuries absolutely do occur during the playing of that sport.
I have also already claimed that the parent does have absolute power to prevent the injury anyway by simply not allowing the child to play the contact sport.
Like I said, disrespect god in this manner is equivalent to disrespecting the parent who allows their child to play contact sport.

 

[McBell]

I do claim that a parent does have foreknowledge that an injury is likely to occur during contact sport. Often the parent will have played that sport themselves and are intimately aware of the known fact that contact sport produces injuries, or if they haven't played it then they have probably seen the sport on the tv or otherwise and are aware that injuries absolutely do occur during the playing of that sport.
I have also already claimed that the parent does have absolute power to prevent the injury anyway by simply not allowing the child to play the contact sport.
Like I said, disrespect god in this manner is equivalent to disrespecting the parent who allows their child to play contact sport.

Make up your mind.
Either it is absolute or it is not.

We will have to agree to disagree.
For in no way can any parent be compared to an all knowing all powerful being.

If your over simplistic comparison works for you, then by all means embrace it.

 

[Peacewise]

Injuries absolutely do occur in contact sport. There is a probability that an injury will occur during any one incidence of a match.
This is also a reasonable analogy for life.

Suffering absolutely does occur in life. There is a probability that suffering will occur at any moment in peoples lives.

I agree that we disagree.

A parent does have absolute control over the choice to let their child play or not play in a contact sport.

My embracing of this is that I continue to respect god and parents.

The concept that God is sitting back and allowing the suffering to occur is the same as the concept that the parent just says yes to contact sport without any consideration. Neither are truth. God provided a variety of holy books and knowledge on ways to minimize suffering (each religion, I've come across, in their own way does this) whilst in sport the coach/parent is obliged to mention the risk of injuries and ways to minimize said risk - which is another analogy for how a parent is similar to God.

When a christian says "our father who art in heaven" they mean Father - a parent.

Now how much should a parent shield their child? Too much shield and the child will be too weak to face responsibility for themselves and may not live a full life, too little shield and the child may suffer too much and be permanently harmed or die - the balance of the shield is a delicate and difficult thing to judge.

Now if we take this most difficult thing to judge, ie the shield, and use our judgment of that shield as a reason to disrespect the parent, then we may have our judgment too harsh, for the parent does love their child and does (hopefully) do their very best to provide just the right level of shielding to prevent permanent harm yet evoke responsibility.

It does indeed come down to faith in our parent, God or biological parents. Do we believe that our parent is smarter than us due to their greater experience and hence we have faith in them and listen to what they have to say, or do we reject that the parent is smarter and has greater experience and hence lose faith in them and perhaps have no respect for them.

Even though we are adult we are as children to God, that's a key concept in understanding some religions imo, and it's another point in favour of accepting the analogy too. God is a parent... well if he exists that is of course, yet the God concept is that He is a parent.

 

[painted wolf]

Yes, but parents are not all powerful and can't prevent injuries like god could.
Parents also don't watch every move their child makes... like many claim god does.

Additionally parents often try to live vicariously through their children, especially through sports... so unless you are saying that god has ego and other mental issues... I'm not sure I can agree to the analogy.

wa:do

 

[Peacewise]

Yes, but parents are not all powerful and can't prevent injuries like god could.
Parents also don't watch every move their child makes... like many claim god does.

Additionally parents often try to live vicariously through their children, especially through sports... so unless you are saying that god has ego and other mental issues... I'm not sure I can agree to the analogy.

wa:do

thanks for joining in.
Parents are all powerful in the context I mention, that being the parent does have absolute control over whether the child plays contact sport or not. - analogy still fits.

A parent watching the contact sport is likely to be watching every move their child makes for that is what the parent is there at the sports field to do. - analogy still fits.

Further the parent could elect to run out onto the sports field and grab their child and stop their child from playing whenever they liked, just as is being inferred of God and the suffering children. - again the analogy still fits.

Does God try to live vicariously through his children, with the implication that God has ego and other mental issues - what a fascinating consideration, yet even if this one aspect does not fit it is merely a single weak exception for not all parents live vicariously through their children and we could simply choose to make the analogy a parent who does not live vicariously through their child if we believe God also is not living vicariously through His children.

I do not know the mindstate of God regarding vicarious living through His children and have never considered it before so I'll think some more on this.

As for ego, i'm fairly sure God is aware of his own worth and hence does have ego.

 

[painted wolf]

Really... I can magically make it so my son never gets injured?
I can prevent my son from ever playing? I can keep him from ever getting together with his friends for a 'pick up game'. Not every game is played in the spotlight.

I'm some kind of magic parent!

Does God try to live vicariously through his children, with the implication that God has ego and other mental issues - what a fascinating consideration, yet even if this one aspect does not fit it is merely a single weak exception for not all parents live vicariously through their children and we could simply choose to make the analogy a parent who does not live vicariously through their child if we believe God also is not living vicariously through His children.

So you can just change things as we go to avoid issues with the argument.

wa:do

 

[Peacewise]

Really... I can magically make it so my son never gets injured?
I can prevent my son from ever playing? I can keep him from ever getting together with his friends for a 'pick up game'. Not every game is played in the spotlight.

I'm some kind of magic parent!


So you can just change things as we go to avoid issues with the argument.

wa:do

There is nothing magical about refusing to give permission for you son to play contact sports whilst he is a child it is your parental right and is within the laws of Australia, for example.

Yet in your discussion which is valid, you merely add to the strength of the analogy, for God has given free will to humanity, and when you allow your son to go outside your direct influence you have also allowed your son freedom to express his will, perhaps in deciding to play contact sport or not. - and still the analogy fits.

As for changing things as we go to avoid issues in the argument, of course we can do that, it's an analogy, however it was you who changed my analogy with your statement of considering a parent vicariously living through their child - this was not part of my original analogy and hence I have simply provided reasoning for why I did not include that in my analogy. If you want to explore that please do.

Do you think God is living vicariously through his children?

 

[androgenous]

I don't understand why you think that it's God's fault when children suffer, or anyone for that matter. We as a human society have learned to consistantly pass blame around to God when we can't come up with a reputable reason. Sure...it must be God reaking havoc on all us poor humans who are just trying to figure out a way to disprove his existence anyway. It was God that told us to kill our brothers, murder our unborn children, steal land, take over countries, and millions of other excuses to blame God. None of these actions were our own choices, of course, it had to be God.

 

[McBell]

I don't understand why you think that it's God's fault when children suffer, or anyone for that matter. We as a human society have learned to consistantly pass blame around to God when we can't come up with a reputable reason. Sure...it must be God reaking havoc on all us poor humans who are just trying to figure out a way to disprove his existence anyway. It was God that told us to kill our brothers, murder our unborn children, steal land, take over countries, and millions of other excuses to blame God. None of these actions were our own choices, of course, it had to be God.

Wow.
You presented a most impressive strawman.
And the skill and dexterity you show whilst attacking it....
Mind blowing!!


PS:
Welcome to the forum.

 

[painted wolf]

There is nothing magical about refusing to give permission for you son to play contact sports whilst he is a child it is your parental right and is within the laws of Australia, for example.

That is only organized sports... unless I can prevent my child from engaging in any sport in school?

Yet in your discussion which is valid, you merely add to the strength of the analogy, for God has given free will to humanity, and when you allow your son to go outside your direct influence you have also allowed your son freedom to express his will, perhaps in deciding to play contact sport or not. - and still the analogy fits.

Except that I can't omnipresently monitor him... and omnipotently protect him.

As for changing things as we go to avoid issues in the argument, of course we can do that, it's an analogy, however it was you who changed my analogy with your statement of considering a parent vicariously living through their child - this was not part of my original analogy and hence I have simply provided reasoning for why I did not include that in my analogy. If you want to explore that please do.

Do you think God is living vicariously through his children?

LoL my views on god are quite different than those of the western faiths.
We are not gods chosen kids for example.

wa:do

 

[Peacewise]

That is only organized sports... unless I can prevent my child from engaging in any sport in school?

In my experience you can prevent your child from engaging in any school sport, phone the school tell them and it's done.

Except that I can't omnipresently monitor him... and omnipotently protect him.

If you are at the match you can continuously monitor the child and take them out of the game at any stage you desire - in this way the analogy fits.

LoL my views on god are quite different than those of the western faiths.
We are not gods chosen kids for example.

wa:do

Ok so it is now revealed that the vicariously living through their children is a red herring for the analogy and as such I won't bother myself thinking about it any more.

 

[Hawkins]

Yes, you have clearly shown that god allows suffering, blames us for it, and has no problems punishing the children for the sins of the parents.

GOOD JOB!

You totally got the wrong concept.

Suffering (other than natural disasters) are most caused by humans. Humans are allowed to execise their free will here on earth which is a place outside God's Kingdom. Those sinful will be judged and stay in a permanent isolation, no one can escape a fair judge (unless you believe in Jesus Christ).

The end result will be, those causing suffering and pain will be kept outside the door of God's Kingdom of eternity. That is, the weeds are identified/distinguished from the wheat with witnessing.

You live your 120 earthly years to show yourself up, while God saves souls to eternity.

 

[McBell]

You totally got the wrong concept.

No I don't.
I just look at it the concept with out the rose coloured glasses.

 

[GoddHader]

I think one of the biggest problems of people who believe in god and religion is inconsistencies, expressed such as god controls everything, it's all in god hands, guides you and me and what not. But when ask the question of "I Can Not Respect A God who Allows Children to Suffer" then divine manipulation and free will becomes contradictory. They never seem to rationally address this philosophical paradox.