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

[1robin]

We have had this discussion before. You know exactly what I am talking about.

I honestly do not. I debate these issues (as they are a favorite of your side) with many people and can't remember who said what.

Bible story says YHVH killed King David's son. The death of the Egyptian children for their parent's actions - in reality it says YHVH wouldn't let him set the Hebrew free - which means YHVH is a murderer in that story. Flood story-death of the innocents, including dumb animals, etc. Then the war stories where they kill everyone including the children, and again the dumb animals, etc.

That's too many. I will cover the first. First on what basis is God's taking back a life he created from a being that did create it not wrong? That story also comes within a context. The context claims that child will be in heaven forever without having to suffer disease, loss, or even the chance of disqualification from heaven. I find that hard pressed to call evil. Even in the worst aspect of the innocent suffering for another's sin in by what standard can you declare it evil? You literally have to have God to declare him wrong. Once you get him you then displace any standard by which to judge him. I am perfectly willing to grant that you and I may not like what God did and feel it inconsistent with out moral wishes but that has nothing to do with proving it evil.

I am not a believer in the Abrahamic religion's God. We are discussing a story, and how CHRISTIANS believe their God to be. Technically I would fall under Agnostic.

As the fabled band RUSH said: If you choose not to decide you have still made a choice and there is no hero in neutrality. You are firmly fixed on ambiguity but it was an answer I guess.

As stated; to me it is just a story. However, Christianity preaches a loving, just, God with a set of laws. Then the story has that God breaking all those laws. Jealous, covetous, murderer, angry, sadist (killing people's infants,) etc.

God's laws do not apply to God. Why would they? They are to regulate faulty finite beings of which he is not. Children are bound by laws their parents do not have. How much greater the differential between an infinite God and us. You would have to show that God had no moral justification for what he did to prove your point. I know that is impossible, that is why I contend those arguments. We do not have a difference of opinion you have an absence of capacity as do I to prove any Godlike being actually wrong. It's a rigged concept but one you chose.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Which is just another reason why I dismiss godless evolution. Science and mankind have made exponential leaps in nearly every field of learning over the past 75 years, able to trace origins of a thousand matters and develop a multitude of fantastic machines, etc. over this same period of time.

And yet...

Fantastic science still cannot demonstrate that evolution ever occurred with any certainty. Why? Because there is no sign of it ever occurring in a profound animal (not bacteria) since man has been around. How strange.

And here we are with all the amazing technology and advancements and still we cannot prove anything on what really happened. Because there are many, many learned scientists (with no religious axe to grind) who remain totally unconvinced of all their claims. The party line is just that, and nothing more.

Uh, yes it can. Evolution is a fact. Biology, genetics and a whole other host of scientific fields don't make any sense without it.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It isn't. It's impossible for you to have a sufficient standard by which to know that even if it was true. I like these smaller posts. What standard can even theoretically judge God? I can and have claimed that IMO Allah is evil but that is far different that proving it.

Allah = god.

You judge god to be good. What standard are you using?

 

[thau]

To SkepticThinker post @ 4:33 pm ---

It is no fact that intelligent rational mankind came from some chimp. It is surely no fact evolution could EVER have occurred without an intelligent designer.

It is no fact that some pancreas sprang up from the ground floor because "natural selection" made some fortuitous calls.

In fact, it is senseless, IMO.

Question: Why would some very intelligent scientists (biologists and anthropoligists, etc) say your evidence is bunk? Why do some highly celebrated evolutionists clash because they say there is no evidence for "gradual evolution" ---- and yet, classrooms insist we have to accept that data as fact?

 

[SkepticThinker]

To SkepticThinker post @ 4:33 pm ---

It is no fact that intelligent rational mankind came from some chimp. It is surely no fact evolution could EVER have occurred without an intelligent designer.

It is no fact that some pancreas sprang up from the ground floor because "natural selection" made some fortuitous calls.

In fact, it is senseless, IMO.

Evolution is a fact. It is supported by mountains of empirical evidence that spans over one hundred fifty years' worth of research.

Nobody says a pancreas sprang up from the ground floor. I'm not even sure what that means. They don't say that mankind came from chimps either, just that chimps are our cousins.

Question: Why would some very intelligent scientists (biologists and anthropoligists, etc) say your evidence is bunk? Why do some highly celebrated evolutionists clash because they say there is no evidence for "gradual evolution" ---- and yet, classrooms insist we have to accept that data as fact?

They don't. The vast majority of mainstream scientists accept evolution because it has been demonstrated. That's why we teach it to school children, which is the same reason we teach them gravity and germ theory.

Some scientists argue about certain aspects of evolution (gradual versus punctuated equilibrium) but they still accept evolution.

 

[thau]

Bible story says YHVH killed King David's son. The death of the Egyptian children for their parent's actions - in reality it says YHVH wouldn't let him set the Hebrew free - which means YHVH is a murderer in that story. Flood story-death of the innocents, including dumb animals, etc. Then the war stories where they kill everyone including the children, and again the dumb animals, etc.

Ok, I will go with your account of these events. Our Lord via nature or the acts of man has ended the lives of many human beings, some being children and (by definition) innocent of horrible crimes or accountability.

Therefore?... what?... our God is evil? Because why? Because your mind says so? And your brain came from where? Hint: our parents were not amoebas. God gave you your limited mind and ability to know and to reason. And yet, man has decided God is evil and that is that.

My God had a higher purpose for destroying Sodom and for destroying the Canaanites and David’s son and the first born of the Egyptians, and others. Some of those reasons may be very obvious (such as bringing evil to its knees as in the case of Pharoah) and some reasons are for lessons not as easily ascertain. But as God says “my ways are not your ways” yetHe has given us all we need to know for our lives and how to act. He has provided for us eternal life and mercy for our faults.

Yet, this is not good enough for your being? You insist death is the greatest of evils? What is death? It happens to us all. In the end what real difference does it make if you live 30 or 50 or 70 years? Explain the difference in terms of how you feel about that once you’re dead?

God’s purpose for our lives is a trial. We are to know right from wrong, charity from selfishness, self denial from self indulgence, and practice those virtues that a well formed conscience tells us what is the right thing to do (even if we have no thoughts of God). On that most will be judged.

What is 70 years on earth compared to infinite years in heaven or hell? What is premature death compared to the wisdom and love of God for all of time?

Here is what Jesus says about death. Matthew 10: 27-28 "What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops. Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear him (i.e. the devil) who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Ok, I will go with your account of these events. Our Lord via nature or the acts of man has ended the lives of many human beings, some being children and (by definition) innocent of horrible crimes or accountability.

Therefore?... what?... our God is evil? Because why? Because your mind says so? And your brain came from where? Hint: our parents were not amoebas. God gave you your limited mind and ability to know and to reason. And yet, man has decided God is evil and that is that.

My God had a higher purpose for destroying Sodom and for destroying the Canaanites and David’s son and the first born of the Egyptians, and others. Some of those reasons may be very obvious (such as bringing evil to its knees as in the case of Pharoah) and some reasons are for lessons not as easily ascertain. But as God says “my ways are not your ways” yetHe has given us all we need to know for our lives and how to act. He has provided for us eternal life and mercy for our faults.

Yet, this is not good enough for your being? You insist death is the greatest of evils? What is death? It happens to us all. In the end what real difference does it make if you live 30 or 50 or 70 years? Explain the difference in terms of how you feel about that once you’re dead?

God’s purpose for our lives is a trial. We are to know right from wrong, charity from selfishness, self denial from self indulgence, and practice those virtues that a well formed conscience tells us what is the right thing to do (even if we have no thoughts of God). On that most will be judged.

What is 70 years on earth compared to infinite years in heaven or hell? What is premature death compared to the wisdom and love of God for all of time?

Here is what Jesus says about death. Matthew 10: 27-28 "What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops. Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear him (i.e. the devil) who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

This confuses me. You say that we could not understand or judge God based off our own logic, cause we are just men. So why presume that you know anything about God at all? Why Presume God is good? or that God cares? Why not simply acknowledge that we cannot even begin to understand God?

The very thing that you are accusing him of doing you're doing yourself. You are saying that God's purpose is trial, who are you to decide what God's purpose is? Even if it is Trial, what grounds do you stand to be able to determine what that trial actually is?

Also what ground do you stand to say that are minds our limited? We've been to space, we can photograph galaxies, we can create amino acids under controlled situations, we can clone animals from blood, we can grow body parts from stem cells, in technology we have advance so much. Look at the computer you are using right now, 50 years ago it would be the size of the room that you sit in, your phone sends messages through space. Look at a CD player, heck listen to a MP3 player, we use electricity to produce sound recorded by people who we have never met. Where is the limit of our minds exactly? What grounds do you have to say that it is limited? What proof do you have that God does not want us to actually know, and even if you have that proof, if our minds are so limited where do you stand to say that you actually understand it? You say 70 years isn't long? That's the average now, an average which didn't exist 70 years ago. So it's a pretty big deal.

You're saying he does not understand God, but you do...but aren't you a man yourself? Also it's Gehenna not hell if i remember the translation correctly.

 

[satori8]

Which is just another reason why I dismiss godless evolution. Science and mankind have made exponential leaps in nearly every field of learning over the past 75 years, able to trace origins of a thousand matters and develop a multitude of fantastic machines, etc. over this same period of time.

And yet...

Fantastic science still cannot demonstrate that evolution ever occurred with any certainty. Why? Because there is no sign of it ever occurring in a profound animal (not bacteria) since man has been around. How strange.

And here we are with all the amazing technology and advancements and still we cannot prove anything on what really happened. Because there are many, many learned scientists (with no religious axe to grind) who remain totally unconvinced of all their claims. The party line is just that, and nothing more.

It's a theory but evolution is pretty damn solid.

Why can't God use evolution to create man? I don't see why not.

 

[satori8]

This confuses me. You say that we could not understand or judge God based off our own logic, cause we are just men. So why presume that you know anything about God at all? Why Presume God is good? or that God cares? Why not simply acknowledge that we cannot even begin to understand God?

The very thing that you are accusing him of doing you're doing yourself. You are saying that God's purpose is trial, who are you to decide what God's purpose is? Even if it is Trial, what grounds do you stand to be able to determine what that trial actually is?

Also what ground do you stand to say that are minds our limited? We've been to space, we can photograph galaxies, we can create amino acids under controlled situations, we can clone animals from blood, we can grow body parts from stem cells, in technology we have advance so much. Look at the computer you are using right now, 50 years ago it would be the size of the room that you sit in, your phone sends messages through space. Look at a CD player, heck listen to a MP3 player, we use electricity to produce sound recorded by people who we have never met. Where is the limit of our minds exactly? What grounds do you have to say that it is limited? What proof do you have that God does not want us to actually know, and even if you have that proof, if our minds are so limited where do you stand to say that you actually understand it? You say 70 years isn't long? That's the average now, an average which didn't exist 70 years ago. So it's a pretty big deal.

You're saying he does not understand God, but you do...but aren't you a man yourself? Also it's Gehenna not hell if i remember the translation correctly.

Wow. I don't think we can describe God. I mean, set aside all the books, we cant describe God. Its like trying to tell a two year old about subatomic particles, how do you do that?

We may be able to get ideas, but still our ideas are flawed.

I did post a scripture, Isaiah, 45:7 which God says he creates light and darkness, good and evil, something to that effect. IOW, he creates the whole shebang, whole ball of wax.

Yet, one of the best names Ive ever seen for God comes from Sufism, which they have a name which means The Great Nothing. And I think they chose this name, because you cannot describe God. God is everything yet nothing. The noise and the silence. All of it. I dont try to define, cause once I open my mouth, it will be flawed. I can try, I just did try. But I know in the end, its flawed.

 

[thau]

This confuses me. You say that we could not understand or judge God based off our own logic, cause we are just men. So why presume that you know anything about God at all? Why Presume God is good? or that God cares? Why not simply acknowledge that we cannot even begin to understand God?

The very thing that you are accusing him of doing you're doing yourself. You are saying that God's purpose is trial, who are you to decide what God's purpose is? Even if it is Trial, what grounds do you stand to be able to determine what that trial actually is?

I am saying this. The evidence for the Judeo-Christian G-d is legion. Be it empirical evidence, historical evidence, prophecies being fulfilled, countless miracles by those closely associated with Christ, and finally pure reason based on a preponderance of the aggregate of all the aforementioned. No other faith or philosophy compares (in total) in the least.

So if one can now accept that premise or fact or reality, there is little reason to think this G-d of ours is here primarily to confuse us. His Word is clear on the core teachings as is His Church, the Roman Catholic Church. Therefore, we know a lot! We just do not know everything about God’s ways --- one of which could be argued why he would have children put to death in some instances.

But that small matter (by comparison to the eternal message) bothers me not. I do not understand all things in total, just as Job did not understand why G-d made him suffer so. But it is what G-d told Job He is telling us --- parphrase --- It is not for you to know all things. I have given you all you need to know and a reason for why I created you. Act upon that and trust me with those higher and more mystical troubles you now have.

That is where some faith is applied.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I am saying this. The evidence for the Judeo-Christian G-d is legion. Be it empirical evidence, historical evidence, prophecies being fulfilled, countless miracles by those closely associated with Christ, and finally pure reason based on a preponderance of the aggregate of all the aforementioned. No other faith or philosophy compares (in total) in the least.

So if one can now accept that premise or fact or reality, there is little reason to think this G-d of ours is here primarily to confuse us. His Word is clear on the core teachings as is His Church, the Roman Catholic Church. Therefore, we know a lot! We just do not know everything about God’s ways --- one of which could be argued why he would have children put to death in some instances.

But that small matter (by comparison to the eternal message) bothers me not. I do not understand all things in total, just as Job did not understand why G-d made him suffer so. But it is what G-d told Job He is telling us --- parphrase --- It is not for you to know all things. I have given you all you need to know and a reason for why I created you. Act upon that and trust me with those higher and more mystical troubles you now have.

That is where some faith is applied.

This is again the interest that I find. You say his words are clear through his church and you claim that the Roman Catholic Church...but Protestants would say differently. Jews would say differently, as would Muslims and those who follow Ba'hai (sp). You say Empirical evidence (I'm not sure what that actually is, are you talking by what is written by the same men who you claim have fragile minds?), historical (there are plenty of scholars who would disagree with you and archaeologist who would scratch their heads at what history you speak of), prophecies...There's quite a bit that I'm sure that those who follow Judaism would have to say about that. You say that those are evidence that God does not seek to confuse us...by what standard do you think God measures confusion?

It would appear that everyone claims to know God, but all we have all shown is that we truly know nothing. So I would not be quick to say that I speak for God...seems risky to me.

 

[thau]

This is again the interest that I find. You say his words are clear through his church and you claim that the Roman Catholic Church...but Protestants would say differently. Jews would say differently, as would Muslims and those who follow Ba'hai (sp).

It would appear that everyone claims to know God, but all we have all shown is that we truly know nothing. So I would not be quick to say that I speak for God...seems risky to me.

Do those faiths have the same evidence I maintain can be found with Catholicism? Not even close, save for Protestantism. But even there is a great drop off. Why not examine all of the documented miracles and tell me with what faith the huge majority are assoicated with? And then which Church? All of the saints who performed miracles are virtually all Catholic. Virtually all of the statues that weep human tears or blood are found in Catholic churches or convents. The great miracles of our time, i.e. Fatima and Lourdes are Catholic. The Eucharistic miracles are Catholic. The exorcisms where the devil is manifest are done by Catholic priests.

I am not making my case here, except to hint at it. Far more can be argued.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Do those faiths have the same evidence I maintain can be found with Catholicism? Not even close, save for Protestantism. But even there is a great drop off. Why not examine all of the documented miracles and tell me with what faith the huge majority are assoicated with? And then which Church? All of the saints who performed miracles are virtually all Catholic. Virtually all of the statues that weep human tears or blood are found in Catholic churches or convents. The great miracles of our time, i.e. Fatima and Lourdes are Catholic. The Eucharistic miracles are Catholic. The exorcisms where the devil is manifest are done by Catholic priests.

I am not making my case here, except to hint at it. Far more can be argued.

I'm sure there are roman catholics who would disagree with you...and each of those faiths do...and I'm not sure the examples you supply are empirical...but to each their own.

You claim to know God with your feeble mind while others do not with their equally feeble mind. Because before God which mind is more feeble then another?

 

[thau]

I'm sure there are roman catholics who would disagree with you...and each of those faiths do...and I'm not sure the examples you supply are empirical...but to each their own.

You claim to know God with your feeble mind while others do not with their equally feeble mind. Because before God which mind is more feeble then another?

All well and good if that is your conclusions. But I ask --- so where does that leave you?

Does that leave you patting oneself on the back for having tried to determine who God is and if He expects anything of us? And since you have decided no one can say for sure, does that mean you get to live your life as you choose and do as you please? Do you really think such a convenient attitude will foster great works of charity and obedience to virtue. No. It will foster a selfish life far too much in pursuit of pleasure and caring little of what your "sins" may beget, especially sins of ignoring the plight of others.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

All well and good if that is your conclusions. But I ask --- so where does that leave you?

Does that leave you patting oneself on the back for having tried to determine who God is and if He expects anything of us? And since you have decided no one can say for sure, does that mean you get to live your life as you choose and do as you please? Do you really think such a convenient attitude will foster great works of charity and obedience to virtue. No. It will foster a selfish life far too much in pursuit of pleasure and caring little of what your "sins" may beget, especially sins of ignoring the plight of others.

You may need a reason to do good, and a reason not to do evil, but do not suppose that everyone is like you. Just as I suppose that I do not know you enough to truly be worried of how you feel. What I have seen is that many claim to know God...and the same who claim to know God are the same who call humanity feeble in mind. Except for them...or better they do not hold themselves to that exact same standard.

It's quite interesting.

But I'm sure you have given all your wealth to the poor and the orphans and the widows, and even when you die all that you have accumulated will go to set up a charity for them. So you are certainly a better person then I am.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Even with my own situation...How could God let me be born to an abusive alcoholic? I believe God knew I would be instrumental in my mother's sobriety, in the happiness of my sibling's lives, and as a mark of nobility in my own soul.

This is what I feel very deeply to be true.

Hypothetical scenario: a caseworker at an adoption agency is looking for a home for an infant boy. He reviews all the available prospective parents and finally decides to give the boy to an alcoholic who he knows will abuse the boy. Sure enough, the boy is abused as he grows up.

What would you think of this caseworker? Has he acted properly? Improperly?

Bonus question: assuming that you think the caseworker acted improperly, what is the relevant difference between his actions and God's decision to have you born to an abusive alcoholic parent? What could make God less culpable?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Do you mean the post which states that the Bible says YHVH personally killed innocents?

If not, I need the post number. I have a lot of posts in this thread.

*

Yes it was; where you were replying to a post of mine. Where I was talking about allowing events which caused suffering to occur, you on the other hand replied with a comment about causing events which inflicted suffering.

I would point out that my reasoning would still hold true for cause as it does for allow; this suffering can still be caused to occur if this particular god concept does not know that suffering will occur (perhaps it was not clear to him that killing people inflicts suffering - seems dubious), or perhaps he was not able to not kill them (dont know why but maybe), or perhaps he did not desire to not kill them (for whatever 'mysterious' reasons).

It isn't inherently impossible... it just takes mental gymnastics.

 

[CG Didymus]

Hypothetical scenario: a caseworker at an adoption agency is looking for a home for an infant boy. He reviews all the available prospective parents and finally decides to give the boy to an alcoholic who he knows will abuse the boy. Sure enough, the boy is abused as he grows up.

What would you think of this caseworker? Has he acted properly? Improperly?

Bonus question: assuming that you think the caseworker acted improperly, what is the relevant difference between his actions and God's decision to have you born to an abusive alcoholic parent? What could make God less culpable?

Great question. Life seems so random sometimes. To think that some people believe in the Christian version of God that is supposedly in control and knows what is best. Yet, the world is a mess. And to think that so many people had only one chance at life to get it right and were born in the wrong place at the wrong time etc. and that somehow that is fair? Whatever, praise God I guess?

 

[SkepticThinker]

All well and good if that is your conclusions. But I ask --- so where does that leave you?

Does that leave you patting oneself on the back for having tried to determine who God is and if He expects anything of us? And since you have decided no one can say for sure, does that mean you get to live your life as you choose and do as you please? Do you really think such a convenient attitude will foster great works of charity and obedience to virtue. No. It will foster a selfish life far too much in pursuit of pleasure and caring little of what your "sins" may beget, especially sins of ignoring the plight of others.

Why not? Lots of people want to do good things and help other people because that's what they want to do. That's why I do them.

Are you telling us that the only reason you don't go out and do bad things is because you think god is watching you? Because I find that a little scary.

 

[yoda89]

I am saying this. The evidence for the Judeo-Christian G-d is legion. Be it empirical evidence, historical evidence, prophecies being fulfilled, countless miracles by those closely associated with Christ, and finally pure reason based on a preponderance of the aggregate of all the aforementioned. No other faith or philosophy compares (in total) in the least.

So if one can now accept that premise or fact or reality, there is little reason to think this G-d of ours is here primarily to confuse us. His Word is clear on the core teachings as is His Church, the Roman Catholic Church. Therefore, we know a lot! We just do not know everything about God’s ways --- one of which could be argued why he would have children put to death in some instances.

But that small matter (by comparison to the eternal message) bothers me not. I do not understand all things in total, just as Job did not understand why G-d made him suffer so. But it is what G-d told Job He is telling us --- parphrase --- It is not for you to know all things. I have given you all you need to know and a reason for why I created you. Act upon that and trust me with those higher and more mystical troubles you now have.

That is where some faith is applied.

There is a great amount of information for the belief in a Judeo-Christian God. There is not any true evidence that has been proven. However, for arguments sake let's there is evidence. How did I receive this information? Was this information witnessed by myself or did someone recite it and teach it to me? If my buddy said "Hey I'm going to kill your loved ones and ruin your life" and then threatened if I did not do what he said he was going to toss me in a pit of fire. Would I consider him all-loving. If I asked him why he did it and he gave the response "I have already told you why its all in that book." Would I be okay with him making a deal with a psychopath about how long it was going to take before I bent over to praise him? If the answers are all in the bible why have so many chapters been deleted? Why doesn't the Vatican open up its information to the public? When people ask you questions are many times you responses because it says so?"