• 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!

Is God in charge?

ProfLogic

Well-Known Member
royol said:
Is God in charge of Tornados, Tsunami, Hurricanes and Floods,
Cancer, Malaria and a myriad of pain giving and death causing diseases?
or is God only in charge of Songbirds, Flowers, Sunsets and Rainbows?
Or is all of the above just Nature at work.

No, god is not in charge of anything. If it was. then it would have given me the chance to experience Tornados, Tsunami, Hurricanes and Floods,
Cancer, Malaria and a myriad of pain giving and death causing diseases. Songbirds, flowers, sunsets, rainbows, they are in charge of themselves.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
ProfLogic said:
No, god is not in charge of anything. If it was. then it would have given me the chance to experience Tornados, Tsunami, Hurricanes and Floods,
Cancer, Malaria and a myriad of pain giving and death causing diseases. Songbirds, flowers, sunsets, rainbows, they are in charge of themselves.
I love how you come up with some stupid if A then B statement that has no basis whatsoever, in order to imply that since B's not true, A must not be. Let me try:

If the moon weren't made of cheese then my skin would be purple. My skin isn't purple, so the moon must be made of cheese.

Hey, that was fun.
 

mr.guy

crapsack
ProfLogic said:
Define nature.
Quite being a pissant. In the context of this argument, many references to tornados, diseases, songbirds, etc. have been (potentially) framed as "nature". Your demand for definition is poorly directed if at me, nor a necessary injection of etymological ambiguity.
 

Bishka

Veteran Member
royol said:
Beckysoup61
Is it your group who believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?

Some do and some don't. I personally think that it could have been that old, but that the elements making up the earth (thus causing for older dating within carbon dating) were MUCH MUCH older.

So yes and no for myself. Other people in my Church are literalists and others aren't. Depends who you talk to. There is not definte doctrine (as far as I know) on this.
 

royol

Member
That is another believe that flies in the face of reason, if it made even a little sense to believe the earth was 6000 years old, you could understand where they were coming from, but to deny their own eyes, is taking things just a little too far.
Last November, I was 7000ft up a mountain in Switzerland, (The StockHorn) the rock at the of the top of the mountain was embedded with sea shells, how would they explain what they can plainly see.
Does the question 'how did the coal and oil get there' ever come up?
I expect an answer could be found, after all, it need not be a very good answer, any rubbish to explain it would be believed, because they want to believe it, plus the fact, they believe in 'Adam and Eve', so any answer would suffice.
I was told there are schools teaching this, (I don't know what to call it) rubbish, to children.
 

Mystic-als

Active Member
If a young boy has a prostitute for a mother. But she loves him with all she has inside of her. And he never knows of her wondering ways to make lots of money. All he knows is that she is the best mom he could wish to have.

Is she a good mother? Is she a good whore?

Someones whore is anothers mother.

Rubbish to you is honey to someone else. Stop pissing in their honey. because one day all you belive in and hold as fact will crumble. And then what?
 

retrorich

SUPER NOT-A-MOD
beckysoup61 said:
Nope, not in the slightest, how about how you elaborate it. The world was perfect before the fall, that's how God created it.

As an atheist, my statements about God are hypothetical.

If God had created a perfect world, the "fall" of Man would not have occurred. As an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent creator, He would be responsible for the imperfections in Man that brought about their fall.
 

mr.guy

crapsack
retrorich said:
If God had created a perfect world, the "fall" of Man would not have occurred.
Maybe this is a problem all of my own, but how do we anticipate what would and wouldn't happen in a "perfect world"?
 

ProfLogic

Well-Known Member
mr.guy said:
Maybe this is a problem all of my own, but how do we anticipate what would and wouldn't happen in a "perfect world"?

How can you say its a problem on our own. If it created humanity, then its responsible to take care of humanity. Otherwise its just like a parent who had given up on thier children. Perfection is defined by ones own self. This is why in this thread. it is not in charge..unless you make it.
 

ProfLogic

Well-Known Member
SoyLeche said:
I love how you come up with some stupid if A then B statement that has no basis whatsoever, in order to imply that since B's not true, A must not be. Let me try:

If the moon weren't made of cheese then my skin would be purple. My skin isn't purple, so the moon must be made of cheese.

Hey, that was fun.

Basing it on the bible where god punished his enemies....well I am one and it never punished me so that's my basis.. It is not in charge, it needs people...
 

SoyLeche

meh...
ProfLogic said:
Basing it on the bible where god punished his enemies....well I am one and it never punished me so that's my basis.. It is not in charge, it needs people...
Your username is very misleading.
 

mr.guy

crapsack
ProfLogic said:
How can you say its a problem on our own.
I didn't.

If it created humanity, then its responsible to take care of humanity. Otherwise its just like a parent who had given up on thier children.
How precisely is responsibility thrust upon the creator of humanity? Your analogy is weak, at best.

Perfection is defined by ones own self. This is why in this thread. it is not in charge..unless you make it.
Take another shot with this bit...it's currently incoherent.
 
Top