Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ah, I see. So it actually is about you feeling like you and your wife are above everyone else that you don't feel you should go through evil like everyone else.
That would be a valid criticism if I didn't think everyone, always, should not have to experience suffering in a universe in which, as you allege, there is a god in control of things. That is of course a hypothetical. The universe actually doesn't have such an actor, in any meaningful sense of such a thing. But if it did, I would not think my wife should have been the only person to obtain relief. She is merely an example, one of countless millions.
I now understand of course that stuff just happens to people -- some of it good, some of it bad -- and it's on us -- you and I -- to do what we can to ease that suffering, and to show compassion and empathy to those who suffer in the meantime*. Suffering doesn't come from supernatural entities, it comes from us and our environment being imperfectly adapted to one another. No one at some supernatural meta-level owed my wife health or long life; that is just a human fantasy that doesn't even exist.
So in reality I've sucked it up way more than you think I should. I haven't celebrated my wife's suffering and death as a testimony to some despotic being's baroque machinations for some supposed future benefit. I have accepted her suffering and death as a somewhat unavoidable situation that I don't have to take personally, and I've moved on. Since her death 8 years ago medical science has progressed in its understanding of her health issues and life is incrementally better for people like her ... they are not suffering as much or dying as often ... and I give full credit where it's due here: to medical science, which is the ONLY group or entity that has made the slightest actual progress against actual, real human suffering of that kind.
* Hint -- it's not done by bullying and belittling people to try to get them to shut up.
That would be a valid criticism if I didn't think everyone, always, should not have to experience suffering in a universe in which, as you allege, there is a god in control of things. That is of course a hypothetical. The universe actually doesn't have such an actor, in any meaningful sense of such a thing. But if it did, I would not think my wife should have been the only person to obtain relief. She is merely an example, one of countless millions.
You have no proof that God does not bring evil on humans. And I don't have verifiable proof He does. Therefore one cannot say with absolute assurance He does not. It is just your best guess.
Quote:
I now understand of course that stuff just happens to people -- some of it good, some of it bad -- and it's on us -- you and I -- to do what we can to ease that suffering, and to show compassion and empathy to those who suffer in the meantime*. Suffering doesn't come from supernatural entities, it comes from us and our environment being imperfectly adapted to one another. No one at some supernatural meta-level owed my wife health or long life; that is just a human fantasy that doesn't even exist.
Again, that is your opinion that Suffering doesn't come from God.
Quote:
So in reality I've sucked it up way more than you think I should. I haven't celebrated my wife's suffering and death as a testimony to some despotic being's baroque machinations for some supposed future benefit. I have accepted her suffering and death as a somewhat unavoidable situation that I don't have to take personally, and I've moved on. Since her death 8 years ago medical science has progressed in its understanding of her health issues and life is incrementally better for people like her ... they are not suffering as much or dying as often ... and I give full credit where it's due here: to medical science, which is the ONLY group or entity that has made the slightest actual progress against actual, real human suffering of that kind.
While that may be so they are living longer (and believe it or not I do feel your pain and empathize with you) nonetheless, they will all die sooner or later anyway no matter how much we advance in medicine. The same medical science that has benefited mankind has also brought much needless suffering and death. Just listen to any medicine commercial about the warnings. So if it isn't God creating the evil it is medicine or militaries or nuns. But God uses all these to further His plan to bring about ultimate good for all.
Quote:
* Hint -- it's not done by bullying and belittling people to try to get them to shut up.
You have no proof that God does not bring evil on humans. And I don't have verifiable proof He does. Therefore one cannot say with absolute assurance He does not. It is just your best guess.
Again, that is your opinion that Suffering doesn't come from God.
....
The logical position is that where neither can prove something or disprove it, the claim should be disbelieved until some proof is forthcoming.
Where the claim lies is dependent on the default. Evil that we can identify comes from natural causes. Evil -or misfortune, rather - the cause of which we can't identify should be regarded as from natural causes (rather than supernatural) until the supernatural is validated.
This means the supernatural claim is the one needing validation and so the burden of proof is one those making the claim. The default doesn't need support in principle; only the need to examine arguments to unseat it as the default. And I doubt that natural cause and result can seriously be debunked.
The logical position is that where neither can prove something or disprove it, the claim should be disbelieved until some proof is forthcoming.
Where the claim lies is dependent on the default. Evil that we can identify comes from natural causes. Evil -or misfortune, rather - the cause of which we can't identify should be regarded as from natural causes (rather than supernatural) until the supernatural is validated.
This means the supernatural claim is the one needing validation and so the burden of proof is one those making the claim. The default doesn't need support in principle; only the need to examine arguments to unseat it as the default. And I doubt that natural cause and result can seriously be debunked.
That is just from your perspective that something needs validation prior to being believed. The default is actually that the Sacred Scriptures should be believed until something comes along to invalidate it. Since such is not the case, the Scriptures are to be believed.
Christians and Jews believe that they have received all the validation they need to believe the Sacred Scriptures. We now, thousands of years removed, take it by faith.
Of course God uses natural causes. After all, He created tectonic plates to slip and cause tsunamis and earthquakes. He created the earth so there would be hurricanes and tornadoes. Even insurance companies have clauses in their contracts called "acts of God" for which they are not liable.
Job was correct when he said:
". . . Indeed should we receive good from the One, Elohim, and should we not receive evil? In all this, Job did not sin with his lips" (Job 2:10).
Yes we should receive evil from God. It is ultimately for our good.
That is just from your perspective that something needs validation prior to being believed. The default is actually that the Sacred Scriptures should be believed until something comes along to invalidate it. Since such is not the case, the Scriptures are to be believed.
Christians and Jews believe that they have received all the validation they need to believe the Sacred Scriptures. We now, thousands of years removed, take it by faith.
Of course God uses natural causes. After all, He created tectonic plates to slip and cause tsunamis and earthquakes. He created the earth so there would be hurricanes and tornadoes. Even insurance companies have clauses in their contracts called "acts of God" for which they are not liable.
Job was correct when he said:
". . . Indeed should we receive good from the One, Elohim, and should we not receive evil? In all this, Job did not sin with his lips" (Job 2:10).
Yes we should receive evil from God. It is ultimately for our good.
I was close to just picking the first sentence before declaring you crashed and burned yet again. because "that something needs validation prior to being believed." is not my opinion but first year logic. And if you deny it, you have given up all claim to being logical.
But your second line does make a point. "The default is actually that the Sacred Scriptures should be believed until something comes along to invalidate it."
I am in a minority here, but I agree. The argument that if you don't accept the Bible as reliable, you must reject every other book is overdone but valid. The Bible exists as evidence. it is going a bit too far to say, though that it should be believed as a default. Histories are taken with a good deal of leeway in order to get any history at all. Especially in ancient history or those who did not seem to share the desire to report facts rather than the desire to make history say what they wanted it to say.
So I do accept the point that the bible should not be decared invalid without good reason. That's why we have the bible debates. I know you won't accept the disproof any more than you accept being thoroughly trashed on Genesis. That doesn't matter because what seems to be a better case is qwhat counts, not your denial.
So, on pretty much all grounds, the Bible is demonstrably not reliable. not Genesis, Exodus, the prophecies of Babylon, Tyre and Daniel, the gospels in toto, Acts and the rant of revelation.
The history from the 10th c to the exile has some valid history, but as we saw with the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem, the story was politically tweaked so much, that the support for the God claim - just as if the Flood was the local flood of the Black sea - is debunked.
I reckon that the burden of disproof has been adequately met and the burden of proof is now on the Bible believers to try and make a case for its credibility.
How d'ye like that, old son?
(p.s I'm not even going to rip this (to be polite) piece of illogic to shreds as I do feel sorry for you.
"Christians and Jews believe that they have received all the validation they need to believe the Sacred Scriptures. We now, thousands of years removed, take it by faith."
I was close to just picking the first sentence before declaring you crashed and burned yet again.
Thanks for the good laugh. Really. At least you are entertaining. At worst, misinformed.
You see ARQ, you cannot disprove that God is not working all together for good.
You cannot prove Christ did not die for your sins and in fact the sins of the whole world.
You cannot prove God does not exist.
You cannot prove God does not love you.
You logically cannot say you can't prove a negative.
Some day you will believe it. You are just one of the ones that will only believe it when you see it. One day you will. It just takes time.
How is a god who allows random suffering (for some unknown greater good) any different than no god at all?
It seems that the difference would be purely academic.
Define "random" in the context of your argument please.
God does not just "allow suffering," as if He is a neutral bystander.
And why do you propose suffering is for an "unknown greater good"?
That all evil is ultimately for good is enough to know.
Rom 8:19-21 For the premonition of the creation is awaiting the unveiling of the sons of God. (20) For to
vanity was the creation subjected, not voluntarily, but because of Him Who subjects it, in expectation"
(21) that the creation itself, also, shall be freed from the slavery of corruption into the glorious freedom of
the children of God."
The good that God is guiding all of creation to is to bring it into the same glorious freedom the children of God enjoy. Creation did not volunteer to be brought into vanity--did not volunteer to be brought into the slavery of corruption. God forced creation into the slavery of corruption and vanity with the goal in mind that one day it will be freed from that. He didn't just "allow" it.
God really is working all together for GOOD.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
