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.
When is it ever justifiable to let huge numbers of people die from starvation, disease, accidents, wars, etc if God has the power to prevent those things from happening? What do you say to the guy who had his arm blown off in a war? "Oh, sorry...God is a personal God and just decided that you are unique enough to not need my help. Your circumstances and life experiences do not really warrant god's intervention."
Why is it justifiable to blame God for everything? Much of the ills of this world are because of man's actions. We introduced sin into this world. We made the bed, now we have to lie in it. Sure God has the power to prevent things like wars but you are asking him to become a puppet master and control individual people's thoughts and actions to keep them from doing harm. God doesn't want to control people like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80
Why not? Isn't that the ultimate endgame in Christianity? No more crying...no more pain? Why do we need to wait until after we die for God to make everything right? Sounds like a scam to me.
Because sin put a curse on our physical bodies. God can not co-exist with sin so there's no way He could allow sin corrupted physical bodies to exist in heaven.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80
Again, why won't God fix the fallen world right now? Jesus's blood sacrifice already paid for the sins of the world, so why isn't "the fall" a thing of the past?
The blood sacrifice didn't eliminate the curse in the physical world. God would have to basically obliterate this earth and create a new one from stratch. . The sacrifice did allow the immortal spirit part of your being to be set free from the curse and become born again.
IF there were a God, there could only be two possibilities:
1) He intervenes AT TIMES, saving people like Tzaphkiel from death by cancer when he sees fit to do so. But then you'd have to buy that, at the same time, he ALLOWS many, many completely innocent children to die horrible deaths every day.
2) He NEVER intervenes, choosing instead to allow us humans to control our own destinies, for better or worse. Okay, but if that's the case, then everyone who thinks they were saved/helped by God, prayer, etc., is simply fooling themselves.
Some Christians claim they have evidence that the deity and an afterlife exist. However, when asked to reveal it, they fail to do so. WHY?
"If there was evidence for the existence of a personal God, what would be the value of faith?"-Joseph Campbell, "The Power of Myth".
It is about faith. No evidence needed. You can make an argument that believing something on faith is "stupid", but said argument would itself not be based on any evidence.
The statement "don't believe anything that science can't prove!" cannot itself be proven scientifically.
There is no rational, scientific evidence for God. But I believe anyway. Why? Because I choose to.
IF there were a God, there could only be two possibilities:
1) He intervenes AT TIMES, saving people like Tzaphkiel from death by cancer when he sees fit to do so. But then you'd have to buy that, at the same time, he ALLOWS many, many completely innocent children to die horrible deaths every day.
2) He NEVER intervenes, choosing instead to allow us humans to control our own destinies, for better or worse. Okay, but if that's the case, then everyone who thinks they were saved/helped by God, prayer, etc., is simply fooling themselves.
So which is it, believers?
Wow, that is one of the most childish, simplistic statements I have ever seen. Congratulations. Never before has there been a post I can refute with five words:
Free will and naturally theology.
Let me explain:
Define "intervene". If I call the cops on my neighbor who is killing someone, did I "intervene"? Yes? Okay. So if the cops don't do anything, am I to blame?
Now, if God intervenes on, say, a famine, by making it possible for people in the first world to stop the famine, but the people do not, who is to blame?
Free will automatically means human suffering, as flawed humans will make the wrong decisions.
And natural theology is the belief that God does not usually break its own rules. It designed the video game, and expects us to win or lose based on playing with no cheat codes.
"If there was evidence for the existence of a personal God, what would be the value of faith?"-Joseph Campbell, "The Power of Myth".
It is about faith. No evidence needed. You can make an argument that believing something on faith is "stupid", but said argument would itself not be based on any evidence.
The statement "don't believe anything that science can't prove!" cannot itself be proven scientifically.
There is no rational, scientific evidence for God. But I believe anyway. Why? Because I choose to.
Then this is not a belief, but a self-induced delusion. I must give you props though because most people aren't willing to admit this, including many on this forum.
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.
