How can a benevolent God allow the Holocaust? (punished, verses, Jesus)
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.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,936,505 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleroo
Well, now you're not talking about a benevolent God anymore, are you? No God that is good would demand people's love or they face wrath. So, make up your mind. Is your question about a wrathful, vengeful, jealous God with a mean streak, or is your question about a GOOD God?
There certainly seems to be some divergence in the manner the biblical god presents himself, isn't there.
I suspect the psychiatric profession has a name for that behavior.
There certainly seems to be some divergence in the manner the biblical god presents himself, isn't there.
I suspect the psychiatric profession has a name for that behavior.
I agree. But your op asked about a good God, not the "bible" God. So, which is it? Are you just wanting to argue about the mixed messages in the bible, or do you want to understand how people can believe in a God that is good?
Nice rant. Last I checked I was not omnipotent. Nor demanded that people loved me or they would face my wrath.
Not a rant...you are the one ranting--against God.
Doesn't matter if you aren't omnipotent or demanding love.
YOU set the standard..."Could help...but don't"...for being demonstrative of "no love", "no compassion", "no morality", and an entity that one should disassociate from...by claiming that about God, because He didn't stop some people from suffering.
Obviously, the people that Hitler caused to suffer are just a small fraction of the people that have suffered throughout human history...yet, those are the only ones you note.
Your main point is that God is claimed to be "good" and "loving"...but you dispute that claim, on the basis He could have helped suffering people, but didn't.
I'm saying...that since YOU have set this standard for "good & loving" as "the prevention of suffering if it is within your power to do so"...and furthermore, you claim it should be determined that you are not if you fail to do that...you should hold yourself to the standard that you put forth. Or be deemed a hypocrite.
Tell ya what cupper...for the sake of your understanding the greater depth of the issue you raise here...I'll play along.
You are right...if that BibleGod guy Jehovah didn't stop Hitler from doing what he did, He not only isn't "all good" and "all powerful", but must be either weak, or bad, and most likely both...and probably doesn't even exist at all.
So...there ya go. I can tell that's what you wanted to hear...well, now ya got it.
BUT!...since YOU have now set the standard for "no love", "no compassion", "no morality", and the trait you think should result in disassociation...as, "Could help...but don't"...I feel that, so as not to be hypocritical, you now must hold YOURSELF to those same standards. And if you don't...you should be declared as having no love, compassion, or morality, and everyone should disassociate themselves from you.
Therefore...since you KNOW there are people starving to death in this world...and it is obvious that it is within your power, and that you have the resources to help some of them from suffering a horrible death by starvation...you MUST do that. You must use any resources that you don't need yourself to survive, and use them to end those other peoples' suffering.
If you fail to do this...you can be determined by YOUR standards as having no love, no compassion, no morality, and I'm sure you'd understand why nobody would want to be associated with you.
After all...there is no other way you could "spin it".
Um, I'm pretty sure he doesn't claim to have god-like power.
With comments like this, I certainly with would avoid any religion you might be involved in.
That is just scary stuff you're saying.
I'm not trying to convert you. And yes, the biological sciences are scary, as I insinuated, they (eugenics) led to the Holocaust.
But I'm suggesting you stop being hypocritical and start subscribing to the "no God exists" and "evolution suffices" explanations and simply see life as a struggle with winners and losers. That would be the scientific outlook.
But apparently you prefer religion and a belief in God with universal, objective, moral rights and wrongs.
So, given you are religious and believe in a God that establishes moral rights and wrongs but Him/Herself is "monstrous," then I'll be avoiding any religion you might be involved in as your religious beliefs are scary.
Fortunately for me I don't accept you as a religious leader of mine. And I won't be converting to your religion.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,936,505 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supine
I'm not trying to convert you. And yes, the biological sciences are scary, as I insinuated, they (eugenics) led to the Holocaust.
But I'm suggesting you stop being hypocritical and start subscribing to the "no God exists" and "evolution suffices" explanations and simply see life as a struggle with winners and losers. That would be the scientific outlook.
But apparently you prefer religion and a belief in God with universal, objective, moral rights and wrongs.
So, given you are religious and believe in a God that establishes moral rights and wrongs but Him/Herself is "monstrous," then I'll be avoiding any religion you might be involved in as your religious beliefs are scary.
Fortunately for me I don't accept you as a religious leader of mine. And I won't be converting to your religion.
Thanks for trying to define me. I will graciously decline your definitions.
I disagree that you clearly explained how it all goes back to the bible, considering that one need not rely on an infallible bible in order to come to the conclusion that God is good. As a matter of fact, as Mr5150 pointed out in a different thread, those who do rely on the bible as an infallible portrait of God do NOT come to the conclusion that God is omni-benevolent. According to it, God's got a mean streak, and they're good with that.
As to your comment: "God is not love. Love is real as we all experience it in one way or another."
I'm not sure why you would assume that because love is real (and I agree that it is), God is not love. Perhaps you could explain that.
You are doing an excellent job of trying to keep the posters focused on the actual issues, Pleroo. I understand why you started the other thread. The existence of "Good" or Love is a structural feature of the Universal field (Consciousness) that establishes and maintains our reality. What people struggle with accepting is the fact that our state of mind (Consciousness) is a tangible part of our reality. Its "products" are real aspects . . . not illusions or abstractions. The state of mind created when we experience love in our consciousness resonates with the consciousness (Universal field) and it becomes a permanent part of it.
ALL the carnal or physical processes of our reality are just temporary aspects essential to maintaining the existence of our reality itself . . . the Universal field or Consciousness of God. All physical materiality is "processed" to maintain and expand the consciousness of God. That is why our "universe" is not just expanding . . . but expanding at an accelerating rate. That is the characteristic of growth and life itself. What we consider Evil is that which is not love and dissonant with the Consciousness of God that is the purpose for the existence of our reality. The carnal "products" we create in our consciousness that are not loving . . . are dissonant with the Universal field (consciousness of God). They will remain temporary and subject to eventual destruction or annihilation along with our physical body. This is why we are to try to have love be the dominant part of our consciousness . . . so it will become permanent.
Last edited by MysticPhD; 09-05-2013 at 08:33 PM..
Um, I'm pretty sure he doesn't claim to have god-like power.
Doesn't matter...that is inconsequential. You don't need "god-like power" to have the ability to keep people from suffering.
Three 5 cent bowls of rice per day will keep a child from starving to death. Who here couldn't spare that amount? I'm sure we could count cupper among those possessing that level of resources...probably many times that level.
He proclaimed the God-descriptors of "good", "loving", "benevolent", etc as bogus---because He didn't stop the suffering of the people that were in the Holocaust.
And then claimed that because God, "Could have helped...but didn't"...that is indicative of God, not being good, loving, and benevolent, but in fact, He has "no love", "no compassion", "no morality", and should be an entity that all should disassociate from.
cuppers' case is: God had the ability to keep people from suffering, but He didn't. He just let them suffer...even though He could have helped. And because of that...He has no love, compassion, or morality...and we should all disassociate from God.
For the sake of argument...I concurred with cupper on his assessment of God based upon His not helping suffering people that He could have helped.
But I then asked cupper if he would hold himself to the same standard that he is holding God. If it can be determined that there are people that are suffering in this world that he has the resources and ability to help...but doesn't, and lets them suffer unaided by him...should we then consider him as having no love, compassion, or morality, and look to disassociate ourselves from him?
I just want him to hold himself to his own standard: If you have the ability to keep people from suffering, but you don't...you should be determined as void of love, compassion, and morality, and all should shun you.
Doesn't matter...that is inconsequential. You don't need "god-like power" to have the ability to keep people from suffering.
Three 5 cent bowls of rice per day will keep a child from starving to death. Who here couldn't spare that amount? I'm sure we could count cupper among those possessing that level of resources...probably many times that level.
He proclaimed the God-descriptors of "good", "loving", "benevolent", etc as bogus---because He didn't stop the suffering of the people that were in the Holocaust.
And then claimed that because God, "Could have helped...but didn't"...that is indicative of God, not being good, loving, and benevolent, but in fact, He has "no love", "no compassion", "no morality", and should be an entity that all should disassociate from.
cuppers' case is: God had the ability to keep people from suffering, but He didn't. He just let them suffer...even though He could have helped. And because of that...He has no love, compassion, or morality...and we should all disassociate from God.
For the sake of argument...I concurred with cupper on his assessment of God based upon His not helping suffering people that He could have helped.
But I then asked cupper if he would hold himself to the same standard that he is holding God. If it can be determined that there are people that are suffering in this world that he has the resources and ability to help...but doesn't, and lets them suffer unaided by him...should we then consider him as having no love, compassion, or morality, and look to disassociate ourselves from him?
I just want him to hold himself to his own standard: If you have the ability to keep people from suffering, but you don't...you should be determined as void of love, compassion, and morality, and all should shun you.
Well, since you quoted me but mentioned cupper a whole buncha' times, I'm gonna have to let him/her take the next at-bat.
My question was quite clear. What possible reason could there be for a God to allow this . Your questions you ask have nothing to do with a possible answer.
Of course they do. You don't have to answer them, though. Uou obviously know the direction I'm headed and you just don't want to go there.
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.
