Why does my God allow children to die? Is he evil?

[Ingledsva]

God created everything--God owns all of creation--lock-stock and barrel--- God says there is 0 room for sin in his world.

First - YOU believe YOUR God created everything!



SO! You are telling us that your God is a wacko, vengeful, murderer, and we just have to accept that YOUR idea of God - this murdering Wacko - has the right to be a murderer because he created us?


It is the things the Bible says this God did - that lets me know he is just made up by humans, - and I don't have to accept this "God" as being in any way real.



*

 

[cottage]

Crap, now I have to go see if Omni benevolence is in the bible, then see what it was translated from, then see what it was translated from means. That is why I need so many words. Well that was easy in three versions and even a topical index Omni benevolence does not appear. Well I do not have to waste words on this one. So far your three for three on characteristics given to God that are not in the bible.

I’ve already told you that as far as suffering is concerned the God of the Bible is subsequent to a question of fact. And that fact is that self-evidently suffering exists. And so for you to say the God of the Bible is not described as ‘all merciful’ is in agreement with what I’ve been arguing all along. And that applies to the attribute of omnibenevolence: I’m simply saying that there is no omnibenevolent God, as self-evidently it would be self-contradictory to argue otherwise. So let’s just sum up so far. I’m saying an all merciful and omnibenevolent God is impossible because evil and suffering exist as a fact, and you are saying the Biblical God is not those things. So it seems to me that we are now finally on the same page?

Yes, every single point you make is a semantic technicality so I MUST be semantically accurate. So far that accuracy has shown the very foundations of your argument are not biblical. You can't have an entire position based on linguistic technicalities and then object to my insistence your language be accurate.

I did not think God is described as all merciful or Omni benevolent because that would conflict with being just. he is merciful, he is benevolent, he is just but he is not any one of them al the time as your argument suggests. He is those things employed at his all knowing discretion.

There are no ‘semantic technicalities’ on my part: I am simply stating what is a plain fact; and Biblical accounts do not make a fact not a fact.

Ok here is where your word choice is relevant because I did use it. I also used creation as a natural expression of his nature. I will now only use the latter to avoid whatever problem it is you have with the former. I have also been thinking about your non-beings can't benefit. Human life is the most valuable commodity in existence to humans. people love life, preserve life, fight for life, would trade anything for life. And that is for this transient veil of tears life. Sounds like we feel it is a benefit of the highest order. From now on use expression of his nature for creation as far as I am concerned. It was to fill a whole in God.

Life is an ‘important commodity for humans’, but only from the point where they began to exist. And he’s ‘expressing his nature’ to whom, or for whom? God is not just a function, but is supposed to be a personal, conscious being that does things for a reason or with purpose.

Crating a being to be in harmony with him does not imply he needed being to be in harmony with him. It is like a painter not having to paint but it is the natural expression of his ability. Suffering is not a caveat. Suffering is a necessity with freewill if used in correctly. You notice when Adam was obedient he lived in perfect contentment. God pronounced the sentence of death for denying the source of all life. Kind of automatic would you not say. However he paid every once of the price to commute the sentence and erase all past, present, and future sins to eventually make us perfect and able to dwell in contentment forever despite out denying life's source. What a monster.

‘A natural expression of his ability’ simply prompts more questions. Why is he expressing his ability - to see if he can still work the ole magic perhaps? Seriously, creation requires a purpose. And there is no coherent purpose. And suffering is not a necessity for free will. Suffering wasn’t something already existent, never mind necessarily existent, God created it. And not even God can erase a thing done. So, yes, a God that exists on those terms you describe might indeed be a monster. For is a murderer of children ever absolved from his crime?

God's character is merciful, benevolent, righteous, vengeful, and just. How these are enacted depends on many things. Your attaching all to some of them is what betrays your argumentation. If all merciful no judgment for evil is possible and that is hardly a just God.

Your last sentence is specious because you’re using evil as pretence for God’s judgement when it is self-evident that evil exists only because God the Creator of all things caused it to exist.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

it is self-evident that evil exists only because God the Creator of all things caused it to exist.

And how does that exactly detract from god? Is that some sort of argument against god, because that argument fails.

 

[cottage]

And how does that exactly detract from god? Is that some sort of argument against god, because that argument fails.

Well, it's certainly not an argument against God per se, if that's what you mean? I can see no logical reason why a creator should not be indifferent or to some extent uncaring about his creation; after all that state of affairs is consistent with the facts, which is the essence of my argument. I'm simply maintaining that self-evidently there is no all merciful or omibenevolent being, despite classical theism presuming to attribute those qualities to the concept of God.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Could you imagine what life would be like if God interfere and prevented every evil that could come upon us? I hardly doubt we would have evolved out of those trees if God choose to interfere with our development.

I think the most merciful thing God could do is just step back and let the chips fall were they may. God isn't like King Suddhodana who actively tried to protect his child from suffering and therefore prevent his enlightenment, God is the opposite of that.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Why is it that nobody has taken into account a dytheistic god. Essentially it is a god who is evil and malicious. The concept that god is wholly good and is good in accordance to our standards of good is naive mostly as you are lowering god tot he level of human beings

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Why is it that nobody has taken into account a dytheistic god. Essentially it is a god who is evil and malicious. The concept that god is wholly good and is good in accordance to our standards of good is naive mostly as you are lowering god tot he level of human beings

My tradition does take that into account. We don't look God as being wholly good but some of us don't view God as wholly evil either.

 

[Sha'irullah]

My tradition does take that into account. We don't look God as being wholly good but some of us don't view God as wholly evil either.

*Gives you a cookie* You are a smart girl . This is the issue nobody ever touches from what I have seen on this forum. I developed a cosmological argument for this exact issue by the way and it helps support objective morality(which I hate) ironically, although not very well. I developed it as an answers to the theosociality.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

*Gives you a cookie* You are a smart girl . This is the issue nobody ever touches from what I have seen on this forum. I developed a cosmological argument for this exact issue by the way and it helps support objective morality(which I hate) ironically, although not very well. I developed it as an answers to the theosociality.

I touched about it a long time ago on this forum when pressed for my concept of God. I posited that God was binary, exhibiting both positive and negative aspects. That God was the sum of all differences.

People didn't react to that too well.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I touched about it a long time ago on this forum when pressed for my concept of God. I posited that God was binary, exhibiting both positive and negative aspects. That God was the sum of all differences.

People didn't react to that too well.

I can bet! I do not think morality is even applicable to god since god has ownership rights to creation. No law subjugates god so no moral basis is applicable for god

 

[cottage]

Could you imagine what life would be like if God interfere and prevented every evil that could come upon us? I hardly doubt we would have evolved out of those trees if God choose to interfere with our development.

I think the most merciful thing God could do is just step back and let the chips fall were they may. God isn't like King Suddhodana who actively tried to protect his child from suffering and therefore prevent his enlightenment, God is the opposite of that.

But would you say that in the case of your own child, if you had in your absolute power to see that it didn’t suffer?

And your argument assumes that God had to create the world as it is, and that evil and suffering is necessary.

In the matter of God creating a world without suffering there are several points to be made, logical and practical. The first is that the world has no necessary existence, it simply doesn’t have to exist, and if it doesn’t have to exist at all then it follows that it doesn’t have to exist as it is. So if God was under no logical compunction to create the world (or us) it certainly can’t be said that he had to create a world containing evil, for there is no logical absurdity in conceiving a world without evil. A typical response to this might be: ‘There would be no point in God creating a world of automatons’, who always did exactly as programmed, and so he created a world of free agents with the power to make choices’. There are two things wrong with that. It assumes that evil must be available as a possible choice - an exquisite example of begging the question, since evil exists only because it is God’s will, and if he didn’t will it then it wouldn’t exist! The other point is that we can make all sorts of choices without having to inflict pain and suffering on our fellow men, and nor do we need evil as a perverse form of adversity test. We can conceive of a world devoid of evil, where the inhabitants co-exist in a harmonious way. And doesn’t that fit the notion of heaven, as believed or envisioned by many theists?

 

[kjw47]

First - YOU believe YOUR God created everything!



SO! You are telling us that your God is a wacko, vengeful, murderer, and we just have to accept that YOUR idea of God - this murdering Wacko - has the right to be a murderer because he created us?


It is the things the Bible says this God did - that lets me know he is just made up by humans, - and I don't have to accept this "God" as being in any way real.



*

Murderers come with no warning---God always warned mortals in advance and gave them a chance to repent) Mortals have been warned about what is coming shortly--but they laugh just like they did at Noah.

 

[kjw47]

No room? Look around friend. There is plenty of sin and suffering in this world you say He created

Not for long--the world has a warning in place for nearly 2000 years of what is to come very shortly.

 

[adi2d]

Not for long--the world has a warning in place for nearly 2000 years of what is to come very shortly.

"The end is near" has been said for 2000 years. Why do you believe you are right when all that came before you were wrong?

 

[Ingledsva]

First - YOU believe YOUR God created everything!



SO! You are telling us that your God is a wacko, vengeful, murderer, and we just have to accept that YOUR idea of God - this murdering Wacko - has the right to be a murderer because he created us?


It is the things the Bible says this God did - that lets me know he is just made up by humans, - and I don't have to accept this "God" as being in any way real.

Murderers come with no warning---God always warned mortals in advance and gave them a chance to repent) Mortals have been warned about what is coming shortly--but they laugh just like they did at Noah.

And as usual you folks are ignoring what was actually said to you!


We are not talking about adult sinners.


The Bible says YHVH PERSONALLY MURDERED innocent babies and children - for the sins of OTHER people.


That is MURDER, and makes that God a wacko out for revenge, or sadistic torturing of parents, for THEIR supposed wrongs.


King David's baby was murdered by YHVH - because King David and Bathsheba did wrong - and David and Bathsheba were left alive - to agonize over their baby's sadistic murder.


In other words - YHVH is a human made-up construct - not God.



*

 

[CG Didymus]

]But would you say that in the case of your own child, if you had in your absolute power to see that it didn’t suffer?

That's funny. We don't have absolute power and most of us would give our lives to save our kids and go out of our way to make sure they don't suffer.

And your argument assumes that God had to create the world as it is, and that evil and suffering is necessary.

That's funny too. The Christian thing seems to be that he created it "good". I've heard some of them even say he created it "perfect", and that we, through Adam and Eve's "rebelling", forced God to allow evil? Yet, he knows all things? How did he not see that coming? What was he thinking? "Hmm, I'll put a tree and the devil in the garden and see what happens?" Not to smart. And then 1Robin thinks that evil is necessary to have true freewill? What?

...God was under no logical compunction to create the world (or us) it certainly can’t be said that he had to create a world containing evil, for there is no logical absurdity in conceiving a world without evil. A typical response to this might be: ‘There would be no point in God creating a world of automatons’, who always did exactly as programmed, and so he created a world of free agents with the power to make choices’.

Automatons... That's funny too. Like a Pink Floyd video of people falling into a meat grinder. A good kid goes to school, goes to church, obeys his/her parents, becomes a good citizen, obeys the laws of the land and goes to work each day, like a robot.

There are two things wrong with that. It assumes that evil must be available as a possible choice - an exquisite example of begging the question, since evil exists only because it is God’s will, and if he didn’t will it then it wouldn’t exist! The other point is that we can make all sorts of choices without having to inflict pain and suffering on our fellow men, and nor do we need evil as a perverse form of adversity test. We can conceive of a world devoid of evil, where the inhabitants co-exist in a harmonious way.

Evil definitely exists. But we, as a civilized society, work hard at minimizing it and we try to stop it. We've even tried telling people that God is watching and will punish them when they die. It works on some. But on others, it don't work at all. It's like God isn't even there. The believers scratch their heads, "How can they not believe in some invisible spirit being in the sky that will reward us good people and punish those no good evil doers?

And doesn’t that fit the notion of heaven, as believed or envisioned by many theists?

Yes it does. We need evil now? For the few years of our existence, maybe as few as 6000 years if the yec are correct. Evil was so necessary for those years, but not necessary for a Christian's time in heaven? What? Freewill isn't necessary there? If it is, is it without suffering and pain? If it isn't, then a person lives on Earth for let's say 60-70 years, makes the right freewill choice and becomes a Christian and then spend billions upon billions of years times another billion praising and worshiping God? Like a robot or... automaton? With no freewill choices? How fun.

Yet, children die, children suffer, they get blow to pieces in the wars grown-ups fight. But that's okay. Because, even if their parents were godless atheists or some false god inspired religion, they will go to heaven. They won't see their parents there. Their parents will be in hell. But, the kids, as long as they die before reaching that mysterious age of accountability, they will go to be with the All, oops, I mean, the Almost All Merciful God. Where they can be happy praising a God they never believed in on Earth. Like little robotic angels. In heaven where there is peace and love and no suffering.

 

[CG Didymus]

"The end is near" has been said for 2000 years. Why do you believe you are right when all that came before you were wrong?

Yes, but now it's nearer. This time for sure. All the signs point to it. I'm getting my ascension robe out of mothballs.

 

[Ingledsva]

First - YOU believe YOUR God created everything!



SO! You are telling us that your God is a wacko, vengeful, murderer, and we just have to accept that YOUR idea of God - this murdering Wacko - has the right to be a murderer because he created us?


It is the things the Bible says this God did - that lets me know he is just made up by humans, - and I don't have to accept this "God" as being in any way real.

Murderers come with no warning---God always warned mortals in advance and gave them a chance to repent) Mortals have been warned about what is coming shortly--but they laugh just like they did at Noah.

And as usual you folks are ignoring what was actually said to you!


We are not talking about adult sinners.


The Bible says YHVH PERSONALLY MURDERED innocent babies and children - for the sins of OTHER people.


That is MURDER, and makes that God a wacko out for revenge, or sadistic torturing of parents, for THEIR supposed wrongs.


King David's baby was murdered by YHVH - because King David and Bathsheba did wrong - and David and Bathsheba were left alive - to agonize over their baby's sadistic murder.


In other words - YHVH is a human made-up construct - not God.



*

Kjw47 - ?????????




*

 

[CynthiaCypher]

But would you say that in the case of your own child, if you had in your absolute power to see that it didn’t suffer?

And your argument assumes that God had to create the world as it is, and that evil and suffering is necessary.

In the matter of God creating a world without suffering there are several points to be made, logical and practical. The first is that the world has no necessary existence, it simply doesn’t have to exist, and if it doesn’t have to exist at all then it follows that it doesn’t have to exist as it is. So if God was under no logical compunction to create the world (or us) it certainly can’t be said that he had to create a world containing evil, for there is no logical absurdity in conceiving a world without evil. A typical response to this might be: ‘There would be no point in God creating a world of automatons’, who always did exactly as programmed, and so he created a world of free agents with the power to make choices’. There are two things wrong with that. It assumes that evil must be available as a possible choice - an exquisite example of begging the question, since evil exists only because it is God’s will, and if he didn’t will it then it wouldn’t exist! The other point is that we can make all sorts of choices without having to inflict pain and suffering on our fellow men, and nor do we need evil as a perverse form of adversity test. We can conceive of a world devoid of evil, where the inhabitants co-exist in a harmonious way. And doesn’t that fit the notion of heaven, as believed or envisioned by many theists?

Why do you presume that God should see us as God's children?

 

[cottage]

Why do you presume that God should see us as God's children?

But I don’t presume that at all. My argument is that there is no all merciful and omnipotent God, and no case can be made to the contrary without running to a contradiction. For if the argument is made that by granting free will we can become enlightened or closer to God, or whatever, then that is to make a case for evil and suffering being necessary. And there are two things wrong with that. Firstly it is false: evil and suffering only exist because an omnipotent God caused and intended for those things to exist and not because of any logical compulsion. Secondly, there is the absurd consequence where free will is being given a higher moral worth than the alleviation or prevention of suffering; on this account the murder of a child, as an act of free will, takes precedence over the child’s suffering and death. Well, I’m sorry, but that is an obscene principle and not an example of mercy.