Questions that believers cannot answer

[Hockeycowboy]

I never said that I believe that God is evil so that is a straw man.
I only ever said that I question whether God is loving and just.

This is what you said….

they do not want to look at the bad things for which God is responsible.

If I thought that, I’d believe He was evil. I’d be as depressed as you seem to be.

Fortunately, from what I’ve been taught, I know God to be loving. Like the Apostle John I quoted yesterday.

There’s a reason explained in the Bible why Jehovah God doesn’t intervene right now.

Interesting that you ask questions — “If God is loving, why…? If God is just, why….? — but you don’t want to discuss the answers.

What are you looking for? What do you want?

 

[Truthseeker]

If YOU were the one suffering the way I have and am right now, maybe you would understand.
As Ed said, others cannot understand until you have walked in my moccasins.

Ed is a wise and good guy. Did he use that exact phrase "walked in my moccasins". He appreciates Native Americans and respects them. He respects me though I am an oddball in person.

 

[Spirit of Light]

@Trailblazer since you can say

IIf you were the one suffering the way I have and am right now,

Then all of this IS ABOUT YOUR SUFFERING.
You are projecting your own suffering in your life, but that is ok you need a place to get it out of you.

 

[1213]

If god didn't create evil, we wouldn't have to learn what it means.
And why do some people have to personally suffer evil but not others? Do people who haven't suffered evil not get eternal life?

People didn't have to know it, they wanted to know evil like God knows and then God allowed it.

And, evil is actually like darkness or emptiness, nothing. It is lack of good. And that we get when we reject God, darkness and emptiness.

I believe all people suffer some kind evil, except maybe those who like evil. However, eternal life is promised for righteous. I think it is possible that person is righteous, even if he has not suffered.

 

[syo]

Questions that believers cannot answer…. without resorting to a plethora of religious apologetics.

If God is loving
I rest my case.

If God is loving, then we need someone to put us off our misery. There's nothing more appalling than a loving god.

 

[Qwin]

No, that is not what I said. I said:

"I am not referring to suffering caused by our own choices we make that cause us to suffer, I am talking about suffering as the result of fate and predestination.

To clarify, I believe that some things that happen to us are subject to human free will and some things are not, because they were predestined by God and we have no control over them. That is called fate.

All things that are not chosen by virtue of our own free are beyond our control and I believe they are predestined by God. God is responsible for both the good and the bad things that happen to us, if those things were predestined."

No, that is not true. Just because I do not understand something that does not mean my logic is faulty because that implies that logic that the use of logic alone would enable me to understand God.

Moreover God is not subject to logic.

Everything in this physical world is subject to the rules of logic but the rules of logic do not apply to God. God is and has always been immensely exalted beyond all that can ever be recounted or perceived, everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men. Such an entity can never be subject to human logic and it would be illogical to think so. It is absurd to expect to be able to encapsulate an infinite God with the finite human mind.

God in this realm is subject to the logic of this realm. God in this realm must follow the rules of this realm. But then, as I inclined and also gave an example, there's logic and logic. That is: there's logic according to your learning, and then there's logic according to your instinct, and 'instinct' - without giving you essays, is the closest applicable word.

Suffering inherited, suffering indirectly. Attribute suffering to God, Angels, demons, the government - to whatever-you-like, but bottom-line, you do not know.

 

[KWED]

So you took the argument to an illogical extreme and that's my problem?

Silly

You argued that without x there can be no y.
I showed that your argument was flawed.
Not my problem if you don't like it.

 

[KWED]

So, as per above, ultimately man creates suffering to the point that a rape victim is still the result of someones choice of not following God.

So if everyone followed the Christian version of god, there would be no rape, that rape is essentially god's way of punishing people for not following him? You'll have to explain that.
(I seem to remember you presenting some rather distasteful arguments and then refusing to defend them before. )

 

[KWED]

Like if you believe that the earth is overpopulated killing a few hundred thousand people makes sense.

That wouldn't make much difference, and they'd have to be high consumers/polluters, which would mean killing affluent people in the developed world. Good luck with that!
Also, religious morality does not see killing people in a "just cause" to be "evil".

The actual effective approach to overpopulation is reducing the size of families through universal, free contraception - something religionists usually consider "evil" anyway.

 

[KWED]

It's his most essential attribute.

Not according to his words and deeds. The evidence suggests he is a nasty piece of work; selfish, cruel, vindictive, vain and intolerant. Can't think of anything that would show god as being "loving" over and above all other attributes.
Perhaps you can enlighten us?

 

[Kenny]

So if everyone followed god the way you want them to, there would be no rape. You'll have to explain that.
(I seem to remember you presenting some rather distasteful arguments and then refusing to defend them before. )

You would have to bring the arguments back for me to know. Sometimes I don't address issues because, to me, it seemed more like a strawman attempt. If it is relevant, I have no problem stating my position.

But, in our faith, yes. If you love God and love your neighbor as yourself, you would not commit rape.

That being said, even among Christians, you will have people who do not reflect God's character and love. And, of course, you also have wolves in sheep's clothing.

In and of itself, if one does follow God with all of your heart, one would not consider rape as an act.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Not according to his words and deeds. The evidence suggests he is a nasty piece of work; selfish, cruel, vindictive, vain and intolerant. Can't think of anything that would show god as being "loving" over and above all other attributes.
Perhaps you can enlighten us?

Dying for all of humanity is pretty darn loving.

 

[KWED]

That is correct. He could have but He didn't.

So we agree that god is a bit of a twat.

BTW, people do grow spiritually by being nice to each other.

So even in this universe, pain and suffering are not necessary.

 

[KWED]

You would have to bring the arguments back for me to know. Sometimes I don't address issues because, to me, it seemed more like a strawman attempt. If it is relevant, I have no problem stating my position.

But, in our faith, yes. If you love God and love your neighbor as yourself, you would not commit rape.

That being said, even among Christians, you will have people who do not reflect God's character and love. And, of course, you also have wolves in sheep's clothing.

In and of itself, if one does follow God with all of your heart, one would not consider rape as an act.

But in the Bible, god encourages his people to commit rape and other "evil" acts, so your argument seems flawed.
Also your argument requires a healthy dose of No True Scotsman, as I'm sure you appreciate.

 

[KWED]

Dying for all of humanity is pretty darn loving.

So god is dead? Nietzsche was right all along!

 

[Kenny]

But in the Bible, god encourages his people to commit rape and other "evil" acts, so your argument seems flawed.
Also your argument requires a healthy dose of No True Scotsman, as I'm sure you appreciate.

could you please support your statement with a scriptural reference? And is "evil" in your perspective according to your standard?

And please support it in light of the New Testament.

 

[The Hammer]

You argued that without x there can be no y.
I showed that your argument was flawed.
Not my problem if you don't like it.

Sure

 

[Truth in love]

Forgiveness for who?

That's true about the lessons, but the person who is suffering such as the baby, or it could be a child or an adult, winds up being collateral damage, just so others can learn lessons.

We all run risks of some harm in life. One of the many comforting promises from God is that He will compensate us for unjust losses.

 

[Truth in love]

None of which deals with the fact that there are literally brain damaged babies being born with no hope of rehabilitation or the capacity to learn. Are they mere sacrifices to teach others? Why do we need a drug dependant baby born every 25 mins in the US alone?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming God for this or suggesting he 'should' fix it. I'm suggesting that this is evidence that not all pain is beneficial to growth.

Unfortunately I can come up with plenty of more compelling and darker examples. This was merely a simple and common one I thought illustrative of my point.

Lets play game of football. To ensure that no one gets hurt we won't actually have any contact, running or passing. Also to prevent any hurt feelings there won't be any good plays or bad ones. no scores kept no celebrating achievement, no choices to be made, no skill to develop, no outcome to be determined.
I'm guessing this is sounding pretty boring. The only way to have achievement and growth is for there to be risk. Now in life there are some pretty major opportunities for love and hate, good and evil.
However in the grand scheme of the eternities it is brief.

I'm guessing that if I offered you $10 for a kidney you say no. On the other hand @ $50,000,000,000 and you'd be tripping over yourself to sign the contract. Mortal life is a high risk short term learning experience and it is very unfair in the short term. However we gave God our consent to come knowing the risks and its on us to try to reduce suffering even when its far beyond us to end it all,

 

[Sheldon]

What's to explain?
It's a simple math equation.

You think mass murder can be reduced to simple maths? Again I have to disagree.

It's completely logical if you happen to be a sociopath.

Well now you're moving the goalposts, a moment ago it made perfect sense, now it only does to a psychopath.

And in the right circumstances I guarantee you a lot of people would make that choice if it wasn't them among the dead.

Well another sweeping unevidenced claim of course, but it gets a so what?