Surely the world we live in proves there is no [loving] God.

[Penumbra]

I appreciate you comment here and you are right of course.
Its just the thought of a God with the power [presumably] of curing a child with cancer not doing so.
Overly simplistic perhaps?

I tend to think of it less in terms of a deity poking and prodding to cure millions of individual cases of cancer and constantly fixing the universe of various things that could be called mistakes, and instead tend to think of it in terms of whether the foundation of the universe itself seems to have anything to do with love or not.

Like, whether things like viruses and cancers and blindness-causing and pain-inducing microscopic parasitic worms need to exist in the first place, whether the predator/prey cycle where life constantly struggles against the possibility of a violent death from attack or prolonged death from malnutrition has to be this way, whether mass extinction events need to be part of the world, etc. The question is, what do these things say about our universe, and what do they say about the hypothesis that our universe is the expression of a deity so filled with love that it's beyond comprehension?

My position is that those things don't work well with that hypothesis, and I haven't seen convincing defenses by theists for their positions. So specifically I don't call those things disproof of the existence of that sort of god (actually I spent a long debate here once with a non-theist about that point), but instead simply view them as very strong evidence against such a thing, especially if no convincing explanation is given in defense of the hypothesis.

Now, that doesn't necessarily say that any sort of god can't exist in some way. There could be a pantheistic god that doesn't have self-awareness or concern for individual life or the overall quality of all life, there could be some impersonal Tao or some mystical concept like a life force or something at the root of the relationship between consciousness and the rest of the universe, there could be multiple gods that exist with varying levels of benevolence or malevolence or apathy that have limited power, there could be a deist clockwork god that set the machine in motion and then doesn't worry about the individual pieces, etc. Debating for the negative for those claims would require different types of arguments, with probably the main one being lack of evidence for their existence.

 

[nazz]

What is one positive aspect of being alive though (besides realising Brahman)? Only one thing is all I need.

I can't think of one good thing, but I can think of hundreds of bad things.

It's difficult to remain 'Pollyanna' in the face of all that. Where are all the 'human interest stories' gone?

How does one overcome all the troubles in the world to find their own degree of personal happiness and salvation apart from it?

Even Buddha said that the world is full of suffering and inequality and his answer was to just meditate and try and overcome/forget about it.

The whole of Buddhism is based on a negative world view...Hinduism too, to a degree (i.e everything is Maya).

It's easy to see how 'everything is Maya' when hate, greed, corruption, adharma is...but what about anything 'good'? if there is anything 'good'.

I want to try and find a positive thing...I really want to, but every time I try, I feel like the biggest hypocrite and ignoramus when I realise I am only kidding myself, by 'cold comforting' myself into a false sense of security, leading to even more delusion.

So, if yourself or anybody else has ideas on how to overcome this, I am all eyes. Thanks.

Good night, George.

For me, God is the ONLY good thing. What good I DO see in this world is an expression of God. And there IS much beauty to behold. And wherever there is real love, there is God. THAT's what keeps me going!

 

[nazz]

How does one make life their 'own personal heaven?'

That is the answer I seek.

I'd answer but it would sound like proselytizing which is not allowed

But more prosaic, I do have one suggestion. There is one place, one time of year, that is the closest thing to heaven on earth I have ever find. It is the Gathering of the Tribes of the Rainbow Family of Love and Light. I highly recommend checking that out. Attending that every year I can helps me to deal with all the other negativity.

 

[Slapstick]

I bumped into a Plymouth Brethren the other day. Now I am not singling out that particular religion but the conversation highlighted a problem I have always had about the God of the bible.

How can you have problems with something you don't believe in?

I asked him “why would a loving God create smallpox for example, or river blindness [Onchocerciasis] or Malaria” and so on. His answer was ‘to test mankind’ ?

Why would you make assumptions that a loving god would create small-poxs?

Surely the world we see around us proves behind all doubt whatsoever that if there is an intelligent creator he is not the loving God that the Christians believe in?

Guess it depends on what you believe.

 

[nazz]

I understand what you're saying, but I also think you're assuming a bit too much. I know how ****** up life can be and I know it very well. But you can either give up and kill yourself or you can try to keep going and change things for the better. So despite what you may think, life really is what you make of it.

I think that is true only to a degree. In a glass half full or half empty situation. But when your glass is almost empty it is hard to pretend it's nearly full.

 

[nazz]

Yes but the answer has to make sense.
Sorry but I have JWs in the family and have debated with them most of my life.
To me you make no sense at all so I will move on.

Well I gave you an alternative Christian view. Did you miss it? Gnosticism is the only Christian perspective that can address these questions in a logical manner.

 

[Slapstick]

I think that is true only to a degree. In a glass half full or half empty situation. But when your glass is almost empty it is hard to pretend it's nearly full.

When your glass is empty, you get to a point where you have no one to blame other than yourself and if you don't blame yourself then you blame everyone else and the world around you.

 

[nazz]

When your glass is empty, you get to a point where you have no one to blame other than yourself and if you don't blame yourself then you blame everyone else and the world around you.

Sorry, but that is simply nonsense. Plenty of people experience suffering that is no fault of their own.

 

[monti]

Love is a mutual feelings,in other words you can't love who hates you and then the question is how to be close to God.

What about unrequited love?

 

[Pegg]

No, they have questions that need answering, and only then can they have an opinion. If the didn't care would they have asked in the first instance? Pegg

people ask rhetorical questions... its a statement of their opinion disguised as a question.

 

[Slapstick]

Sorry, but that is simply nonsense. Plenty of people experience suffering that is no fault of their own.

Who's fault is it then? Everyone is capable of making choices and decisions for themselves or on their own.

 

[Pegg]

Provide scientific evidence for that, please. I'm tired of Christians claiming all sorts of stuff that supposedly happened but giving zero evidence for it.

Why do you think the human family is divided into three? the Japhetic, Hamitic, and Semitic races are the three branches of mankind to whom all other races can be traced genetically.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

I bumped into a Plymouth Brethren the other day. Now I am not singling out that particular religion but the conversation highlighted a problem I have always had about the God of the bible.
I asked him “why would a loving God create smallpox for example, or river blindness [Onchocerciasis] or Malaria” and so on. His answer was ‘to test mankind’ ?

Surely the world we see around us proves behind all doubt whatsoever that if there is an intelligent creator he is not the loving God that the Christians believe in?

Just as an alternate perspective...there is a way God could make the world completely free of all problems a) wipe out mankind but he did that once and promised he wouldn't do it again (apparently) or take away our free will and make us into emotionless robots? I'm not sure I'd want to live as an emotionless robot.

I know that only answers to human wrongs etc...as to natural illnesses and disasters? I'm not really sure, I suppose it's all apart of nature and all of nature has a purpose. For example some are allergic to bees but bees are important in honey production, pollination etc

 

[FearGod]

What about unrequited love?

Won't success.

 

[LuisDantas]

Just as an alternate perspective...there is a way God could make the world completely free of all problems a) wipe out mankind but he did that once and promised he wouldn't do it again (apparently) or take away our free will and make us into emotionless robots? I'm not sure I'd want to live as an emotionless robot.

That I find odd, perhaps because it implies that God somehow needs our permission to let us know better.

I always have trouble with explanations that rely on that elusive concept of "free will".

It does not seem to have any clear meaning beyond somehow being valuable to humans despite limiting God's ability to help mankind.

I am not sure it is supposed to make sense, frankly.

I know that only answers to human wrongs etc...as to natural illnesses and disasters? I'm not really sure, I suppose it's all apart of nature and all of nature has a purpose. For example some are allergic to bees but bees are important in honey production, pollination etc

That brings the question of whether our challenges with nature are somehow meant to be. And then, whether it is against God's will for us to try and overcome then (for instance, by having anti-anaphilatics to treat allergies to bee toxin). But that is still not a clear answer, because at some point we must take reign of our own destinies. We are certainly not meant to accept that we will hunger if we don't feed and do nothing about it, for instance.

 

[suzy smith]

I tend to think of it less in terms of a deity poking and prodding to cure millions of individual cases of cancer and constantly fixing the universe of various things that could be called mistakes, and instead tend to think of it in terms of whether the foundation of the universe itself seems to have anything to do with love or not.

Like, whether things like viruses and cancers and blindness-causing and pain-inducing microscopic parasitic worms need to exist in the first place, whether the predator/prey cycle where life constantly struggles against the possibility of a violent death from attack or prolonged death from malnutrition has to be this way, whether mass extinction events need to be part of the world, etc. The question is, what do these things say about our universe, and what do they say about the hypothesis that our universe is the expression of a deity so filled with love that it's beyond comprehension?

My position is that those things don't work well with that hypothesis, and I haven't seen convincing defenses by theists for their positions. So specifically I don't call those things disproof of the existence of that sort of god (actually I spent a long debate here once with a non-theist about that point), but instead simply view them as very strong evidence against such a thing, especially if no convincing explanation is given in defense of the hypothesis.

Now, that doesn't necessarily say that any sort of god can't exist in some way. There could be a pantheistic god that doesn't have self-awareness or concern for individual life or the overall quality of all life, there could be some impersonal Tao or some mystical concept like a life force or something at the root of the relationship between consciousness and the rest of the universe, there could be multiple gods that exist with varying levels of benevolence or malevolence or apathy that have limited power, there could be a deist clockwork god that set the machine in motion and then doesn't worry about the individual pieces, etc. Debating for the negative for those claims would require different types of arguments, with probably the main one being lack of evidence for their existence.

Which leads nicely back to my thread thank you Penumbra. I was only targeting the God of the Bible. Beyond that we are into speculation and guess work. I think its all a computer game myself and I want to win it.

 

[suzy smith]

Well I gave you an alternative Christian view. Did you miss it? Gnosticism is the only Christian perspective that can address these questions in a logical manner.

Gnosticism is not an alternative to me because I am not an atheist without good reason.
I did not miss your post, I just rejected it on the grounds that all religion is illogical and without any scientific evidence.

 

[sinner]

Surely the world we see around us proves behind all doubt whatsoever that there is a devil [remember?].
Do your problems & mistakes prove you didn't have loving parents?
Seems like you're mad at God for not existing.

 

[nazz]

Gnosticism is not an alternative to me because I am not an atheist without good reason.
I did not miss your post, I just rejected it on the grounds that all religion is illogical and without any scientific evidence.

But it does address your question though. It counters your objection in a logical manner. That was the point.

I don't believe in anything that is illogical and I challenge you to refute that.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Why do you think the human family is divided into three? the Japhetic, Hamitic, and Semitic races are the three branches of mankind to whom all other races can be traced genetically.

No, it isn't. You obviously know nothing about modern genetic science. There are no such thing as "races", especially 3 that we can be neatly categorized into. It doesn't exist. Go learn about genetic markers. "Semitic" is an ethno-linguistic term, not a racial one. It's the same as "indo-European" or "Indo-Aryan". "Japhetic" and "Hamitic" are not scientific terms and don't exist outside of the Bible.

So that's another point where your Bible is proven wrong when compared to reality.