The way I look at it is this: Either God exists or God doesn't exist. Neither position can be proven with absolute certainty or reliability, although I believe there is very good evidence for God's existence so I operate under the belief that God exists.
I respect that, but still, at the end of the day, it's a belief that relies upon a guess. The problem with guessing is that most of the time, our guesses are wrong. That's why many people want concrete data, hard information about things before attempting to draw any conclusions.
I agree, if we assume that God does not exist, then most of the discussion is moot, and that is why it seems rather odd to me to see so many atheists talking about God, unless they are open to the possibility that God exists.
Many believers here have started threads questioning atheists why they are non-believers. But most of us have had some measure of religion in their lives, even if only in the sense of how religion pervades throughout the culture in general. But believers go far beyond a simple claim that "God exists." They're claiming much, much more about God than that, and I would consider it fair game to challenge some of the various premises that are offered, regarding God's intentions, God's feelings, God's character and personality, as well as God's overall nature.
I believe that God has a plan for humanity collectively, but I do not believe that God has an individualized plan for each person, and I absolutely do not believe that God micromanages every detail of everyone's lives. In fact, I do not believe that God manages anyone's lives; I believe that God allows and expects humans to manage their own lives, and that is why we were given a brain and free will.
Then what do we need God for? Why should we feel compelled to worship or even acknowledge a God who has ostensibly put us here to fend for ourselves? I don't make any claims as to why we're here or if there's any purpose or plan to it all. I agree that humans should manage their own lives and make their own choices, but why can't people just accept it at face value? Why have a "God" without a shred of hard evidence? No one can possibly know why we're here, or much of anything else, other than that we're here on some kind of planet floating through space.
What believers are these? Even Christians believe that we all have free will, so why would God be managing our lives? It makes no sense, but maybe they mean that God is guiding them. I believe that is possible as God can guide us without managing our lives and interfering with our free will.
I've heard people talk about "guardian angels" as if they're a real thing. Many people believe in such things. Many people say things like "God loves you" and "God has a plan for you."
I would say, if one is claiming that God created the universe, it would imply that God also created the mechanisms and processes by which the universe operates, including the cycle of life on planets which support life (as much as we puny humans can understand it). Humans are mortal; we are not immortal beings. Was this due to God's intention, or was it just a fact of nature that God had nothing to do with?
We can't survive outside of the Earth's atmosphere, not without being in a spaceship with a supply of oxygen, food, and water. If we assume that God designed it that way, then it would imply an intention to keep us, more or less, stuck on this planet, with a constant need for air, water, food, and sleep.
That, coupled with the claims from some humans (such as those who wrote the scriptures and/or claim to be messengers) that they have communicated directly with God and have established the parameters and traditions by which most people in our culture perceive God, it has led to the expectation that "God is good." That's what believers often say. Sometimes they even sing songs that say "God is love."
By making and/or maintaining claims that God has visited humans and (at least in one part of the world at certain times in the distant past) actually did manage people's lives and implies that God continues to do so (or will do so...someday), it keeps such expectations alive.
This may not be God's fault, but it may be humans' fault for believing in religion.
Who knows? Maybe if there is a God, isn't it possible that he doesn't want us to believe in him? Maybe he really wants us all to be atheists? Wouldn't that be a hoot?
No, God doesn't give children leukemia, it is a disease that some children contract, just like all other diseases. Why do people think God gives it to children? Since leukemia can be explained with a no God belief, that means it can exist in the absence of God, so that alone means there can be other causes. Why blame God for something He did not do?
I am saying that God doesn't give children leukemia, but that does not mean that God doesn't exist.
The salient question no atheist has been able to answer when I ask is why God should prevent childhood leukemia or anything else that humans don't like. Who are humans to say what an all-powerful and all-knowing God should do? Do you even understand how illogical that is?
We don't know that God exists at all. There are medical, scientific explanations as to why children get leukemia - although even they don't have all the answers. I trust that scientists and doctors are working on cures, vaccines, and other treatments for diseases like leukemia, cancer, COVID, and many others. I think society should work to support them and encourage more research for the betterment of humanity. They have come a long way in the past 100 years, especially when compared to the previous 1000 years of medieval medicine. It's troublesome that there are those in society who seem to want to set medicine back, either because of superstition - or for the love of money. But that's a human secular issue that God need not worry about. We'll handle it.
As for God and your assertion of how illogical it is, let's assume there is a God. Let's further assume that God is all-knowing and all-powerful. By assuming that God created the planet, including humans, our life cycle, and the mechanisms and functions by which our bodies operate, then human vulnerability to diseases like leukemia come part of the bargain. Unless you're saying that an all-powerful God made a mistake or caused an accident. Is that logical or illogical?
But let's just assume that God just set the parameters, while the mechanisms of nature operate within those parameters. That's why God won't control the lottery numbers, the roll of the dice, or whether or not a child contracts leukemia. That's just a matter of luck (good or bad), or probably more in the realm of probabilities. There might be other factors that medical science has discerned, but I get your point that it's still possible that God may just allow some things to take their natural course. So, it's not really his fault that a child gets leukemia, and you say it's illogical to blame God or expect God to make a miracle to save the child (although many religions claim that God does make miracles, which make some wonder why God would ostensibly be playing favorites).
But the key thing is, God is also said to be all-knowing, so it's implied that he
knows a child is dying of leukemia. It's very likely the child's parents have been praying to God, beseeching him to have mercy and save their child. But he ignores their prayer. Praying doesn't make a whit of difference.
Either way you look at it, I would see that as direct evidence that we're essentially on our own, and we're dealing strictly with the natural world and whatever we can deduce about it through scientific and other means which humans - and only humans - have devised for themselves. No God was needed whatsoever. Which is just as well, since he's not going to do anything anyway - even if he did exist, and even if he could.
It does not logically follow that just because God does not eliminate all suffering, including childhood leukemia, that God is evil. That is completely illogical because it is based upon human expectations of what an omnipotent God should/would do. That an omnipotent God should/would do what humans expect Him to do is in itself illogical, as I explained in this post:
#325 Trailblazer
Evil is an act that humans commit and all evil is the result of human free will choices to disobey God's Laws.
I simply entertain it as a possibility. Anything is possible. It's possible that God exists. It's possible that God doesn't exist. It's possible that God exists and is "good," and it's possible that God exists and is "evil." It's possible that multiple Gods may exist, and some may be good, some evil, some neutral. God could be totally indifferent. The bottom line is, there's no real way of knowing.
Maybe there is no "good" or "evil" in the universe. Maybe God's laws aren't really God's at all - just the laws of humans who felt they were necessary and practical for the society they were living in.
But that's what the Problem of Evil seems to be truly addressing. It's not a question of whether or not God actually exists (although that's an important question by itself), but it goes to the true heart of the matter and questions the notion that "God is good" or "God is love."
It's easy to blame humans for evil, but there are still many humans who are good and demonstrate great acts of love for their fellow human. That's where the only real "good" comes from, not from God. Without humans, there's nothing but cold, heartless wilderness and nature. Neither good nor evil, just indifferent. It's just how it is.
Strictly speaking, you're right. It is illogical to argue that God is evil, but it's equally illogical to argue that God is good or that God is love. Where is the logic in that?
All suffering is not the result of man's choices to commit evil acts. Suffering is just part and parcel of living in a material world, which is the cause of suffering. The only thing you can hold God responsible for is creating a world in which He knew humans would suffer often through no fault of their own. Not only that, but human suffering is very unevenly distributed. Not only that, but why do animals suffer? No animal can ever be blameworthy because animals do not make moral choices.
Unfortunately there are no answers to these questions unless you consider religious apologetics to be answers. I don't.
No, I don't consider them to be answers, and as I said, no one has any of these answers. I just wish people would stop pretending that they do have all the answers, when in fact, they don't.
