Sign in to follow this  
Theunicornhunter

Is God responsible for natural disasters?

Recommended Posts

This was from another thread and I wanted to respond but not within that thread because it was off-topic?

 

The King  Today, 06:40 PM Post #11 

 

Well I was thinking. When a major natural disaster occurs, why do people say "God will help the poor people who suffered.....etc etc........"?

 

Why don't they say "If God didn't send the earthquake and the following tsunami in the first instance, then no one would have died?"

 

It seems to me you're making assumptions about what people that believe in God "should think" and that people that believe in God should think God's purpose is to prevent all unhappiness, suffering and misfortune. Why are people supposed to believe that? On the other hand people that don't believe in God are to free to see the world in terms of chance regarding the natural disasters that occur.

 

The truth is - Earth life is fraught with misfortune and sometimes we are subject to the natural laws that govern this planet. In my faith we belief we had a choice in agreeing to come to this Earth and we agreed to live by those laws of chance in order to have the opportunity to come here. There is a purpose for our coming here which is part of an eternal plan - a purpose that makes the chance of misfortune worth it.

 

I find comfort from knowing there is a purpose to life - that we can be re-united with lost loved ones and there is hope for a better world. (but that doesn't mean you don't experience grief) In this world there are those that forego personal fame or acquiring material possessions etc to help the less fortunate. And there are others who use power, position etc to gain unequal access to the world's wealth which leaves many of the world's poor living in circumtances that make them vulnerable to natural disasters - because they lack adequate housing etc. We each have a choice as to which kind of person we want to be. If God prevented us from making that choice - if He forced each of us to act charitably He would deny one of His fundamental laws - which is the Law of Agency or choice.

 

If life were judged purely by Earthly standards - then it definitely isn't fair -evil often triumphs and the innocent suffer. Some children live short painful lives and some hateful people live many decades. But that's like describing an elephant based on a picture of it's trunk - there's a lot more to the picture.

 

Tragedies such as the earthquake and tsunamis in Asia are horrific and there is much suffering but the fact that suffering occurs does not negate God's existence. Now we can choose what if anything we want to do to help alleviate suffering in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems to me you're making assumptions about what people that believe in God "should think" and that people that believe in God should think God's purpose is to prevent all unhappiness, suffering and misfortune.

 

Why are people supposed to believe that?

 

I'm not telling them what to think. I'm simply pointing out a contradiction as I see it. Admittedly some unhappiness, suffering and misfortune is created by human beings. That doesn't extend to a wall of water obliterating everything in it's path. If things like that a "natural" disaster, then god did not create it, send it and therefore cannot prevent it. IMO, this is because there is no god to do these things.

 

On the other hand people that don't believe in God are to free to see the world in terms of chance regarding the natural disasters that occur.

 

That's right.

 

The truth is - Earth life is fraught with misfortune and sometimes we are subject to the natural laws that govern this planet.

 

That's true, but IMO, these are NATURAL laws, created by no powerful being

called God.

 

In my faith we belief we had a choice in agreeing to come to this Earth and we agreed to live by those laws of chance in order to have the opportunity to come here.

 

In my belief, we evolved on this planet and there are certain things beyond our control, earthquakes being one of them, tsunami being another.

 

There is a purpose for our coming here which is part of an eternal plan - a purpose that makes the chance of misfortune worth it.

 

I don't think there is a god created eternal plan, I think our purpose is to live and improve the world to leave it in a better state than it was when we were born.

 

When religious people talk about "divine plans, grand designs, mysterious ways", IMO, that's just a cop-out. They say those things because they have no idea why a alledgedly benevolent god would allow innocent people to suffer and die.

 

I find comfort from knowing there is a purpose to life - that we can be re-united with lost loved ones and there is hope for a better world. (but that doesn't mean you don't experience grief)

 

I think there's a purpose to life too. But it's a purpose we decide to take and aim for. There is IMO, no god who creates or plans this purpose.

 

In this world there are those that forego personal fame or acquiring material possessions etc to help the less fortunate.

 

There certainly are.

 

And there are others who use power, position etc to gain unequal access to the world's wealth which leaves many of the world's poor living in circumtances that make them vulnerable to natural disasters - because they lack adequate housing etc.

 

There are also governments of those afflicted countries who deprive the people of safety and warning features to alert them before they are hit by giant waves.

 

We each have a choice as to which kind of person we want to be. If God prevented us from making that choice - if He forced each of us to act charitably He would deny one of His fundamental laws - which is the Law of Agency or choice.

 

But we don't have a choice on whether or not we want either ourselves or our loved ones to be swept out to see by incoming waves? Whether certain people are charitable or not, this means nothing to the thousands of people killed today. It wasn't the uncharitable segments of society killed today, it was those people hit by the tsunami.

 

If life were judged purely by Earthly standards - then it definitely isn't fair -evil often triumphs and the innocent suffer.

 

Even by divine standards, evil shouldn't even exist. If your god is all-good and all-powerful, then he presumable could remove it from the world? If he can't, then he's not all powerful. If he won't, then he's not all-good because he allows evil to exist. Why should the innocent suffer? Why wouldn't your god protect them? By definition they are innocent, they have done nothing wrong.

 

Some children live short painful lives and some hateful people live many decades. But that's like describing an elephant based on a picture of it's trunk - there's a lot more to the picture.

 

I find it hard to justify why a child would be born with a terrible disease or condition which would give them either a short life, or a long miserable one.

 

For me, all of this points to "no god", and some people make other people's lives miserable, we get hit by natural disasters and people do suffer from diseases and such. Some things like for example natural disasters can't be prevented, and the best we could do is to be alerted to them and seek shelter or safety. Some diseases may be cured or treated as we discover the means to do so. But I don't think that a god has anything to do with it.

 

Tragedies such as the earthquake and tsunamis in Asia are horrific and there is much suffering but the fact that suffering occurs does not negate God's existence.

 

IMO, it does, because if your god existed, he should have stopped the disaster from happening.

 

Now we can choose what if anything we want to do to help alleviate suffering in the world.

 

Yes, we could find the bodies of the missing people, rebuild their shattered homes, bury their dead, and treat their injured.

 

What the point of my initial comment was, that after all that, I would not be telling someone who has suffered in this disaster that a god is with them in their search for the missing, since that god was the one who killed them in the first place.

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ItalianGirl

 

Personally, I believe in the ancient story where you set up what will occur in your lifetime before your soul comes to join your body.

 

Therefore, those who sacrificed their lifes today, did so according to their life plan.

 

Today's earthquake and tidal waves were long ago set in motion, and these people today just fulfilled part of their destiny.

 

In this case, I believe that the victims were killed because an earthquake set off a tsunami, which travelled across the water and devestated whereever it hit. The people died because they had little or no warning and no defence against it.

 

I don't think it was preordained. I think it just happened.

 

God is not intentionally cruel.

 

I don't think it even exists.

 

He works with us, not against us.

 

For arguments sake, if it existed, and this is the way it works with us, then I'd rather take my chances without it's help.

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For arguments sake, if it existed, and this is the way it works with us, then I'd rather take my chances without it's help.

292668[/snapback]

 

 

So you don't believe in things like destiny then? :( :laugh: B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you don't believe in things like destiny then?   

 

I do believe in certain situations people who meet and fall in love are compatible with each other and it's natural that they will be together because there are so well suited to each other that they have so much in common, they mesh so perfectly together.

 

I don't think they have a SET path for the future, but they will be together in the future in some form, though the EXACT destination may vary to some degree depending on certain factors whether internal or external.

 

But I don't think it's written before they were born, and that would extend to natural disasters too.

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you don't believe in things like destiny then?   

 

I do believe in certain situations people who meet and fall in love are compatible with each other and it's natural that they will be together because there are so well suited to each other that they have so much in common, they mesh so perfectly together.

 

I don't think they have a SET path for the future, but they will be together in the future in some form, though the EXACT destination may vary to some degree depending on certain factors whether internal or external.

 

But I don't think it's written before they were born, and that would extend to natural disasters too.

292671[/snapback]

 

 

 

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh, so you answer would be NO then? :( :laugh: B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh, so you answer would be NO then?   

 

In your definition of the term "destiny", then yes that would be my answer.

 

I don't think the future is written. :(

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you don't believe in things like destiny then?   

 

I do believe in certain situations people who meet and fall in love are compatible with each other and it's natural that they will be together because there are so well suited to each other that they have so much in common, they mesh so perfectly together.

 

I don't think they have a SET path for the future, but they will be together in the future in some form, though the EXACT destination may vary to some degree depending on certain factors whether internal or external.

 

But I don't think it's written before they were born, and that would extend to natural disasters too.

292671[/snapback]

 

 

But that's not destiny.

 

Not meant to be together.

 

If the future's not written, than your example of love doesn't mesh with your answer.

 

Nothing is written in stone by your definition.

 

Therefore, the love issue doesn't come into play at all.

 

People may have many soulmates, not just one.

 

And by your definition, there is no such thing as a soulmate or a true love.

Edited by italiangirl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's not destiny.

 

Not meant to be together.

 

If the future's not written, than your example of love doesn't mesh with your answer.

 

Nothing is written in stone by your definition.

 

Therefore, the love issue doesn't come into play at all.

 

People may have many soulmates, not just one.

 

And by your definition, there is no such thing as a soulmate or a true love.

 

In my definition, if two people are perfectly compatible to the point where a life together will be possible and happy, then they are "destined" to be together. But I don't believe that their paths were set before they were born, because that would imply that something behind the scenes is pulling the strings as opposed to the free will of the people involved.

 

"Soulmate" and "true love" for me mean two people are are perfectly suited to each other and share a deep emotional connection.

 

But the fact is that it is THEIR personal connection, not created by some mythic god figure.

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's not destiny.

 

Not meant to be together.

 

If the future's not written, than your example of love doesn't mesh with your answer.

 

Nothing is written in stone by your definition.

 

Therefore, the love issue doesn't come into play at all.

 

People may have many soulmates, not just one.

 

And by your definition, there is no such thing as a soulmate or a true love.

 

In my definition, if two people are perfectly compatible to the point where a life together will be possible and happy, then they are "destined" to be together. But I don't believe that their paths were set before they were born, because that would imply that something behind the scenes is pulling the strings as opposed to the free will of the people involved.

 

"Soulmate" and "true love" for me mean two people are are perfectly suited to each other and share a deep emotional connection.

 

But the fact is that it is THEIR personal connection, not created by some mythic god figure.

292677[/snapback]

 

 

I never said "God" created that.

 

I say that we have free will and we choose these "options' before we come to earth.

 

Thus why there is more than one soul on earth who is "compatable" for you.

 

Your argument somewhat supports mine.

 

God simply doesn't say "this person will be a leper, this person will get breast cancer".

 

We choose those experiences to grow as souls. From the hardest lessons, come the greatest growth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never said "God" created that.

 

Not by name. But destiny implies some path has been set by something.

 

People for the most part decide their own future, barring external factors, illness, death etc....and they base on that on their compatibilty.

 

I say that we have free will and we choose these "options' before we come to earth.

 

I think we have free will, although many times this is hindered by enviromental factors, such as nature and the actions of others. But I don't think these are chosen before we are born, except for various laws which limit free will in the case of criminal acts.

 

Thus why there is more than one soul on earth who is "compatable" for you.

 

There could be, but I wouldn't want to go looking for another if I've already found true happiness and love.

 

 

God simply doesn't say "this person will be a leper, this person will get breast cancer".

 

I don't think he does either, because I don't believe any such being exists. If it did, he wouldn't allow people to suffer from those ailments unless it was evil itself.

 

We choose those experiences to grow as souls. From the hardest lessons, come the greatest growth.

 

We can experience things and learn things without suffering. For example, You don't need to be stabbed to know that it will hurt if you are. If you've read it someplace, then you've learned that without suffering.

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

King, I already knew you were an athiest because you have previously stated that. That was not my point.

 

My point was that you have failed to do is support your thesis that if God exists then His purpose must be to prevent suffering and make everything good and happy etc etc. Why is it a contradiction to believe in God but accept that He allows suffering? Other than the fact you said it was?

 

In the same vein - why if God exists - must He eliminate evil?

 

-a couple of points - I think some of the people killed in this and in other disasters are more vulnerable because of poverty (quality of housing) so in that way our choices do affect people.

 

And another question, if life is merely the result of an accident (a spark in the protoplasmic soup) how can you say there is any purpose to life? We exist because the laws of probability rolled our number. There is no right or wrong - there is no good or evil - we simply are that is all. And while we are all free to adopt any philosophy or belief system we choose including the belief we have a duty to improve life there is no basis for concluding any one philosophy is more "right" than any other. In fact, even the concept of "improve" is subjective.

 

 

The truth is - Earth life is fraught with misfortune and sometimes we are subject to the natural laws that govern this planet.

 

That's true, but IMO, these are NATURAL laws, created by no powerful being

called God.

I believe I said they were natural laws - your original post suggested if God existed He would intercede in natural laws - a conclusion I do not find persuasive.

 

So again I ask - what is the basis for the assumption that if God existed He would make this world a fairyland or utopia and anything less than that is evidence there is no God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can experience things and learn things without suffering. For example, You don't need to be stabbed to know that it will hurt if you are. If you've read it someplace, then you've learned that without suffering.

292680[/snapback]

 

 

I don't think it's the same.

 

When you have children, you see even as small beings how it takes "lessons" to learn things.

 

The lessons of childhood shape who you are as an adult.

 

The bigger lessons of adulthood project us further along.

 

You simply can't say that, as it can't always apply.

 

I can "imagine" how horrible it may be to lose a parent, but I really didn't learn the full impact of that until my own father died.

 

Nothing can prepare you for that.

 

Tis why we must go through certain situations to grow as individuals.

 

Certainly you've had situations in your life where you feel you've come out stronger, and more wise because of your experiences. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point was that you have failed to do is support your thesis that if God exists then His purpose must be to prevent suffering and make everything good and happy etc etc.

 

Well, I did say "for arguments sake", that is you believe that a god exists, so again for the sake of this argument, if he allowed suffering to exist, then he would not be "all good", so I don't see how you could have faith in a god being that is in some part, evil because it would allow people to suffer needlessly.

 

Why is it a contradiction to believe in God but accept that He allows suffering? Other than the fact you said it was?

 

Because it's often said that this mythic god is good, so I see no rational in people following a being who causes pain, suffering and misery in others.

 

In the same vein - why if God exists - must He eliminate evil?

 

Well, why allow it? We don't allow people to commit crimes simply to show that they are harmful and unwanted in society, so why would a god allow evil to exist?

 

-a couple of points - I think some of the people killed in this and in other disasters are more vulnerable because of poverty (quality of housing) so in that way our choices do affect people.

 

It's likely that their homes would have been destroyed regardless. What they needed was an early warning system and an effective evacuation plan. They didn't because of the ineptness of their governments. Though if the tsunami never happened, they wouldn't need those things, which is why I'm saying that god doesn't exist, because if he did, he should have stopped the disaster from occuring.

 

And another question, if life is merely the result of an accident (a spark in the protoplasmic soup) how can you say there is any purpose to life?

 

We bring purpose to it, through our own choices. We've evolved to the point where we can choose what to do with our lives and our world, if we want to do so.

 

We exist because the laws of probability rolled our number.

 

We exist because the conditions on this planet allowed us to evolve into what we are now.

 

There is no right or wrong - there is no good or evil - we simply are that is all.

 

There is right and wrong, there is good and evil. We decide as a civilisation what we consider acceptable and what we don't.

 

And while we are all free to adopt any philosophy or belief system we choose including the belief we have a duty to improve life there is no basis for concluding any one philosophy is more "right" than any other.

 

It doesn't matter about which philosophy is "right". What I'm saying, that IMO I do not believe in a god, and after a tsunami, I think that telling someone that a god will help them find their lost loved ones after god sent the tsunami in the first place is quite absurd.

 

In fact, even the concept of "improve" is subjective.

 

My defination of improvement would be things like developing technology, medicines and materials to allow people to live happier lawful lives. Also, to relieve suffering, to remove those who make the world a dangerous place and so forth.

 

That's true, but IMO, these are NATURAL laws, created by no powerful being

called God.

 

That's right.

 

I believe I said they were natural laws - your original post suggested if God existed He would intercede in natural laws - a conclusion I do not find persuasive.

 

If it was as good as religious people believe, then it should intervene. I don't think it exists at all. I think the planet features certain enviromental and natural occurances such as earthquakes and such.

 

So again I ask - what is the basis for the assumption that if God existed He would make this world a fairyland or utopia and anything less than that is evidence there is no God.

 

But that's exactly what certain religious groups believe. That a Kingdom Of God will emerge one day and all will be peaceful and happy.

 

I don't believe it myself because if a god created this planet and us along with it, he wouldn't have created the possibility of the planet having things like earthquakes, tsunamis and other occurances that don't serve humans in any way.

 

It's more rational IMO, that there is no god, the planet evolved naturally, earthquakes sometimes occur and we get killed because of them.

 

A theoretical god could have designed the planet WITHOUT such "natural" disasters, one better suited to our safety needs. The fact it didn't prevent yesterdays disaster can be explained like this...."God, does not exist".

 

Or

 

By your logic......"God exists and occasionally, he likes to allow thousands of people to die horribly".

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can "imagine" how horrible it may be to lose a parent, but I really didn't learn the full impact of that until my own father died.

 

Nothing can prepare you for that.

 

Tis why we must go through certain situations to grow as individuals.

 

Exactly, but I'd rather not know what that is like.

 

I wouldn't need to lose a parent to know it would hurt me deeply.

 

Certainly you've had situations in your life where you feel you've come out stronger, and more wise because of your experiences. 

 

True, but in certain cases, I'd just as sooner have not gone through them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A theoretical god could have either designed the planet WITHOUT such "natural" disasters, one better suited to our safety needs. The fact it didn't prevent yesterdays disaster can be explained like this...."God, does not exist".

 

Or

 

By your logic......"God exists and occasionally, he likes to watch thousands of people die horribly".[/b]

292689[/snapback]

 

 

But what if my theory is right?

 

That the earth is a school of such for souls, to progress the soul further along. And in which you get to choose your life lessons each lifetime?

 

That wouldn't make God a horrible being, rather, if he is allowing us to choose these events, and grow from them, he's actually being a "good God". :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can "imagine" how horrible it may be to lose a parent, but I really didn't learn the full impact of that until my own father died.

 

Nothing can prepare you for that.

 

Tis why we must go through certain situations to grow as individuals.

 

Exactly, but I'd rather not know what that is like.

 

I wouldn't need to lose a parent to know it would hurt me deeply.

 

Certainly you've had situations in your life where you feel you've come out stronger, and more wise because of your experiences. 

 

True, but in certain cases, I'd just as sooner have not gone through them.

292690[/snapback]

 

 

 

Nothing can prepare you for just HOW deeply.

 

You can never know until you experience it.

 

Just as we are now saying how horrible it must be for everyone who has in some way been apart of this tragedy, we can never know fully what it was like until we go through it ourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But what if my theory is right?

 

That the earth is a school of such for souls, to progress the soul further along. And in which you get to choose your life lessons each lifetime?

 

I don't think it is.

 

Because I come to something that often creates a problem in theories of "multiple lives" that some people are born with terrible conditions or suffer them later in life through no fault of their own.

 

I do not believe that people would choose a life of relative misery.

 

That wouldn't make God a horrible being, rather, if he is allowing us to choose these events, and grow from them, he's actually being a "good God". 

 

Again, I don't believe a person would choose suffering, just for an experience, unless they were disturbed in some way.

 

Nothing can prepare you for just HOW deeply.

 

You can never know until you experience it.

 

I have no wish to experience it. I don't want to know how painful it may be.

 

Just as we are now saying how horrible it must be for everyone who has in some way been apart of this tragedy, we can never know fully what it was like until we go through it ourselves. 

 

Obviously, I do have sympathy for those lost, injured or bereaved.

 

And of course, I have never been hit by a tsunami and I don't know what it would be like for a person who has been in the few seconds of their lives remaining.

 

But it's safe to say, it wouldn't be pleasant, and thus, I don't want to be struck by a tsunami.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm sorry to say you're looking at this from a "human" point of view.

 

A soul well may choose to strengthen itself.

 

As for your parent dieing, I'm sorry you will one day have to experience it. Everyone does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I'm sorry to say you're looking at this from a "human" point of view.

 

Because I'm human.

 

A soul well may choose to strengthen itself.

 

It depends on the condition of the "body" and the availability and effectiveness of the medical treatment.

 

As for your parent dieing, I'm sorry you will one day have to experience it. Everyone does.

 

Not necessarily.

 

I may die before my parent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE

It seems to me you're making assumptions about what people that believe in God "should think" and that people that believe in God should think God's purpose is to prevent all unhappiness, suffering and misfortune.

 

 

QUOTE

Why are people supposed to believe that?

 

 

I'm not telling them what to think. I'm simply pointing out a contradiction as I see it. Admittedly some unhappiness, suffering and misfortune is created by human beings. That doesn't extend to a wall of water obliterating everything in it's path. If things like that a "natural" disaster, then god did not create it, send it and therefore cannot prevent it. IMO, this is because there is no god to do these things.

 

So you're saying that God's existence depends on physical aspects? God creates anything, but you assume his nature. Actions do not speak of words. He created nature, which destroys. Look at this for a second. Can we humans destroy things? We were created by man. Can we destroy things? Can we wage war? We have volition, but science dictates that the laws of the earth are set. Are they not? Are there not convection currents? Do we really understand the whole world? The universe? You cannot base the evidence of an omnipotent being by just looking at one aspect of creation.

 

QUOTE

The truth is - Earth life is fraught with misfortune and sometimes we are subject to the natural laws that govern this planet.

 

 

That's true, but IMO, these are NATURAL laws, created by no powerful being

called God.

 

So you're saying that laws just exist. Can you give a good explanation of how these laws came into being?

 

QUOTE

In my faith we belief we had a choice in agreeing to come to this Earth and we agreed to live by those laws of chance in order to have the opportunity to come here.

 

 

In my belief, we evolved on this planet and there are certain things beyond our control, earthquakes being one of them, tsunami being another.

 

Apparently you haven't read the October 2004 isue of Scientific American. They theoretically can control hurricanes. However, we can create tsumanis and earthquakes, and convection currents that are cause by natural law. If we can, why can't God?

 

QUOTE

There is a purpose for our coming here which is part of an eternal plan - a purpose that makes the chance of misfortune worth it.

 

 

I don't think there is a god created eternal plan, I think our purpose is to live and improve the world to leave it in a better state than it was when we were born.

 

When religious people talk about "divine plans, grand designs, mysterious ways", IMO, that's just a cop-out. They say those things because they have no idea why a alledgedly benevolent god would allow innocent people to suffer and die.

 

Who gave you that goal? If you look at the Bible, it's not a cop-out. Loook at our DNA. You're saying that the world is so random, we appeared, here, why do we all exist? One deletion, or addition of a nucleotide basis can cause a frame shift. This one base can turn you into a pile of goo. The proteins would sequence wrong. One base. Would randomness create a spellchecker? There is literally a basechecker for DNA synthesis. Did that happen randomly as the Big Bang states. Because the Big Bang states that everything was random. The Bible itself in Revalations shows that GOD can cause earthquakes, control locusts, etc. IF YOU READ THE BIBLE I THINK YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND.

 

QUOTE

I find comfort from knowing there is a purpose to life - that we can be re-united with lost loved ones and there is hope for a better world. (but that doesn't mean you don't experience grief)

 

 

I think there's a purpose to life too. But it's a purpose we decide to take and aim for. There is IMO, no god who creates or plans this purpose.

 

God lets you have the volition to decide what you want to do. He has given you a purpose, but many choose not to accept it.

 

QUOTE

And there are others who use power, position etc to gain unequal access to the world's wealth which leaves many of the world's poor living in circumtances that make them vulnerable to natural disasters - because they lack adequate housing etc.

 

 

There are also governments of those afflicted countries who deprive the people of safety and warning features to alert them before they are hit by giant waves.

 

What does that have to do with God? That is inflicted by people.

 

QUOTE

We each have a choice as to which kind of person we want to be. If God prevented us from making that choice - if He forced each of us to act charitably He would deny one of His fundamental laws - which is the Law of Agency or choice.

 

 

But we don't have a choice on whether or not we want either ourselves or our loved ones to be swept out to see by incoming waves? Whether certain people are charitable or not, this means nothing to the thousands of people killed today. It wasn't the uncharitable segments of society killed today, it was those people hit by the tsunami.

 

Look at this perspective: Why do we build in places where there is geographic risk? The risk has been there for thousands of years. If you live there, you accept it.

 

QUOTE

If life were judged purely by Earthly standards - then it definitely isn't fair -evil often triumphs and the innocent suffer.

 

 

Even by divine standards, evil shouldn't even exist. If your god is all-good and all-powerful, then he presumable could remove it from the world? If he can't, then he's not all powerful. If he won't, then he's not all-good because he allows evil to exist. Why should the innocent suffer? Why wouldn't your god protect them? By definition they are innocent, they have done nothing wrong.

 

Do you dictate divine standards? Many religions are dualistic. Christianity states that evil was first incarnated in Lucifer, the most beautiful of angels, a seraphim. He decided that he was too proud for God. He decided he was better than God. He then became Satan. God lets him have a chance to tempt man. He wants man to choose between himself and Satan. God gave us the chance through Jesus, the son in the trinity. He gave us the chance to escape from sin through his cleansing power. He gives us the chance of eternal life. That is what Christianity is about.

 

QUOTE

Some children live short painful lives and some hateful people live many decades. But that's like describing an elephant based on a picture of it's trunk - there's a lot more to the picture.

 

 

I find it hard to justify why a child would be born with a terrible disease or condition which would give them either a short life, or a long miserable one.

 

For me, all of this points to "no god", and some people make other people's lives miserable, we get hit by natural disasters and people do suffer from diseases and such. Some things like for example natural disasters can't be prevented, and the best we could do is to be alerted to them and seek shelter or safety. Some diseases may be cured or treated as we discover the means to do so. But I don't think that a god has anything to do with it.

 

Most of what you point out for evidence for no God is due to the point that we can't explain why those things that we can cause occur. My explanation is as good as yours. Can you explain how those things can occur randomly? That is the only option if you were to believe there is no God.

 

QUOTE

Tragedies such as the earthquake and tsunamis in Asia are horrific and there is much suffering but the fact that suffering occurs does not negate God's existence.

 

 

IMO, it does, because if your god existed, he should have stopped the disaster from happening.

 

Who says that God has to do stuff for you? He gave you the chance for eternal life. Why do we deserve to exist? Are we that selfish? Do we even deserve life?

 

QUOTE

Now we can choose what if anything we want to do to help alleviate suffering in the world.

 

 

Yes, we could find the bodies of the missing people, rebuild their shattered homes, bury their dead, and treat their injured.

 

What the point of my initial comment was, that after all that, I would not be telling someone who has suffered in this disaster that a god is with them in their search for the missing, since that god was the one who killed them in the first place.

 

Did God kill them? Or did natural laws that God created kill them? The natural laws did. If we can kill and murder each other, is God murdering the people? NO! You would never say that. Isn't it the same for those laws that he created?

Edited by WEAREBORG4102

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you're saying that God's existence depends on physical aspects? God creates anything, but you assume his nature. Actions do not speak of words. He created nature, which destroys.

 

I don't think he created nature, because I don't believe he exists.

 

What I'm saying, is that those who believe in god must consider one of two things.

 

1) God created nature and placed it beyond his control and therefore also placed our lives in the random hands of nature, therefore why worship him? For what reason? He's not protecting you, he won't intervene.

 

2) God did not create nature, but nature exists, so god doesn't exist.

 

Look at this for a second. Can we humans destroy things? We were created by man. Can we destroy things? Can we wage war?

 

Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes.

 

We have volition, but science dictates that the laws of the earth are set. Are they not?

 

That's true. Although we make certain choices, there are things beyond our current power, like travelling faster than light.

 

Are there not convection currents? Do we really understand the whole world? The universe? You cannot base the evidence of an omnipotent being by just looking at one aspect of creation.

 

But there's no evidence for the existence of a god. There are certain things we cannot accomplish because of physical constraints, but we have evidence for those, whether it be theoretical or material.

 

So you're saying that laws just exist. Can you give a good explanation of how these laws came into being?

 

Yes. Natural laws in this case exist because the planet's surface crust is divided into tectonic plates which move, when the stress builds us, they move suddenly, causing an earthquake which shifts the seabed, which alters the water, which results in a tsunami.

 

Apparently you haven't read the October 2004 isue of Scientific American.

 

No, that one got lost in the mail.

 

They theoretically can control hurricanes. However, we can create tsumanis and earthquakes, and convection currents that are cause by natural law.

 

We could cause an earthquake, and a tsunami. But we wouldn't create either that would kill thousands of people.

 

If we can, why can't God?

 

We "could", doesn't mean we will. Why not God? Because if he existed and he wanted to kill thousands of people, then he's a threat to the people of this planet. But he didn't, because IMO he does not exist.

 

Who gave you that goal?

 

I did. By observing suffering that is taking place in the world, and deciding that we should resolve problems like that.

 

If you look at the Bible, it's not a cop-out. Loook at our DNA. You're saying that the world is so random, we appeared, here, why do we all exist?

 

It's random in the sense that it occured naturally, but now we've evolved to this state, we can give ourselves purpose.

 

One deletion, or addition of a nucleotide basis can cause a frame shift. This one base can turn you into a pile of goo. The proteins would sequence wrong. One base. Would randomness create a spellchecker?

 

In a sense yes, because through randomness, it came up with us, and we develop our own "spellcheckers" over time, whether that being medicine, technology etc.

 

The Bible itself in Revalations shows that GOD can cause earthquakes, control locusts, etc. IF YOU READ THE BIBLE I THINK YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND.

 

I think you need to step out of the Bible from time to time. If God existed and he could create those things, then he's a enemy. I don't think humanity needs god to create earthquakes or control locusts. If he existed, we would need him to spare us from those things.

 

And you don't have to use full caps. I can read normal text.

 

God lets you have the volition to decide what you want to do. He has given you a purpose, but many choose not to accept it.

 

No he doesn't. If a child is born with a terrible disease or illness, they didn't choose to be that way, unless your god wants their purpose to be a life of suffering?

 

What does that have to do with God? That is inflicted by people.

 

Exactly, I'm saying that's why so many people died.

 

The whole point of this thread came from my statement saying that telling people god is looking for the victims of this disaster is ridiculous, because god must have created the tsunami which killed people in the first place.

 

How many times do I have to repeat that?

 

Look at this perspective: Why do we build in places where there is geographic risk? The risk has been there for thousands of years. If you live there, you accept it.

 

If you use that logic, then we should not give money to people suffering from famine? Because they settle in areas of poor farming?

 

But religious people are supposed to be charitable. So which one is it? Charitable or ruthless?

 

Do you dictate divine standards?

 

"Man" generally does, since I believe human beings created myths such as god.

 

Its just contradictory.

 

Many religions are dualistic. Christianity states that evil was first incarnated in Lucifer, the most beautiful of angels, a seraphim. He decided that he was too proud for God. He decided he was better than God. He then became Satan. God lets him have a chance to tempt man. He wants man to choose between himself and Satan. God gave us the chance through Jesus, the son in the trinity. He gave us the chance to escape from sin through his cleansing power. He gives us the chance of eternal life. That is what Christianity is about.

 

Yes, Christianity is full of great stories. But that's all they are.

 

If it was a real occurance God wanted to, he could have just destroyed Satan, since he was only an angel. But he let him live to cause misery for humans, so god needs to sort out his priorities.

 

Most of what you point out for evidence for no God is due to the point that we can't explain why those things that we can cause occur. My explanation is as good as yours. Can you explain how those things can occur randomly? That is the only option if you were to believe there is no God.

 

I do believe there is no God. Certain diseases occur for very real reasons, just as genetic flaws and such, which medical research will overcome hopefully, given enough funding and research. If we cure them, that will be OUR accomplishment, not that of a god being.

 

Who says that God has to do stuff for you?

 

Why not? If he alledgedly created people, then let them suffer?

 

He gave you the chance for eternal life.

 

No he didn't. When did this choice present itself?

 

I was given no choice for eternal life.

 

Why do we deserve to exist?

 

Because we want to. We take our future into our own hands as much as possible.

 

Are we that selfish?

 

Yes. We want to live, but we are also capable of great generousity.

 

Do we even deserve life?

 

Yes, unless some people present a danger to others, then they may need to be taken out.

 

Did God kill them?

 

No.

 

Or did natural laws that God created kill them?

 

No. He did not create them. I don't believe he exists, therefore I don't think he created anything.

 

The natural laws did.

 

That's right, but they weren't created by a god.

 

If we can kill and murder each other, is God murdering the people?

 

No, because he didn't create us. When people kill and murder others, we deal with those people under our own laws.

 

NO! You would never say that. Isn't it the same for those laws that he created?

 

No, because there was no "he" to create anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point was that you have failed to do is support your thesis that if God exists then His purpose must be to prevent suffering and make everything good and happy etc etc.

 

Well, I did say "for arguments sake", that is you believe that a god exists, so again for the sake of this argument, if he allowed suffering to exist, then he would not be "all good", so I don't see how you could have faith in a god being that is in some part, evil because it would allow people to suffer needlessly.

 

Again, all you offer is your opinion that if suffering exists then God must be evil.

 

 

Because it's often said that this mythic god is good, so I see no rational in people following a being who causes pain, suffering and misery in others.
Allowing suffering is not the same as causing suffering.

 

In the same vein - why if God exists - must He eliminate evil?

 

Well, why allow it? We don't allow people to commit crimes simply to show that they are harmful and unwanted in society, so why would a god allow evil to exist?

 

If part of the purpose of this life were to learn to choose between good and evil we must have evil to be able to make an informed choice.

 

As for suffering (which is not the same as evil) we may experience it because we made a choice before we came to this Earth that we believed in agency or the right to choose and we were willing to accept the consequences that go with freedom. If God did not allow us to act freely we would be puppets rather than beings of free will.

 

And as hard as it is to believe I have heard many people relate how personal tragedies have strenghtened them or made them better people.

 

We exist because the laws of probability rolled our number.

 

We exist because the conditions on this planet allowed us to evolve into what we are now.

an extremely improbable occurence hence the gambling reference (according to Carl Sagan the probability of life evolving on any particular planet is extremely low)

 

There is no right or wrong - there is no good or evil - we simply are that is all.

 

There is right and wrong, there is good and evil. We decide as a civilisation what we consider acceptable and what we don't.

Yes we can decide anything we want but there is nothing intrinsically right or wrong about anything and if the majority decides to believe in slavery or infanticide by your definition that would be right because that is what people chose to do. Good and evil can not exist as an absolute value if their value is determined by changing public opinion.

 

And while we are all free to adopt any philosophy or belief system we choose including the belief we have a duty to improve life there is no basis for concluding any one philosophy is more "right" than any other.

 

It doesn't matter about which philosophy is "right". What I'm saying, that IMO I do not believe in a god, and after a tsunami, I think that telling someone that a god will help them find their lost loved ones after god sent the tsunami in the first place is quite absurd.
Well, as you yourself stated God did not send the tsunami - it is an occurence of the natural (ie physical) laws that govern this planet. However, God can help individuals find peace in suffering - and I've heard a great many testimonials from people who have experienced that.

 

In fact, even the concept of "improve" is subjective.

 

My defination of improvement would be things like developing technology, medicines and materials to allow people to live happier lawful lives. Also, to relieve suffering, to remove those who make the world a dangerous place and so forth.

That's a nice definition but throughout history people have other definitions - some of them not so nice and there's nothing to stop it from happening again.

 

By your logic......"God exists and occasionally, he likes to allow thousands of people to die horribly".[/b]
No one ever said He liked or enjoyed the suffering of His children but He let us make a choice - which was to come to this Earth and accept the dangers it offers. We could have never left His presence and continued in peace, harmony etc. However, we would have never experienced what lies beyond this life and we wanted that enough to accept the risks. To say He must intervene and not allow us to accept those or else be deemed evil is IMO, shortsighted. IMO, evil would be to not allow us to experience this Earth and forego the opportunities that come after this life because we might experience pain in the process. It's like a parent never letting their child try things like swimming, gymnastics or walking in open field because they might hurt themselves in the process. They very well might - but is the benefit derived from those activities worth the risk?

 

Thus, I beleive there is a third option you have left out of your "choices" for those that believe.

 

3. That God offered us an opportunity to come to the Earth, live a mortal life and experience physical hardships - we accepted the offer and the risks because we believed the reward was worth the risk (a sort of cost/benefit analysis). For God to subsequently intervene would show disregard for our right to choose and possible deny us the opportunities that lie ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Modern Man is partly Responsible for the Global Warming ("with the stuff that comes from Cars and Factories")mind u there was also the Natural Fluctation of Global Warming and Ice Ages throughout the Earths Long History but the other Disasters are because the Earth is always slowing moving so the Earth is responsibile for the Earthquakes not God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you're saying that God's existence depends on physical aspects? God creates anything, but you assume his nature. Actions do not speak of words. He created nature, which destroys.

 

I don't think he created nature, because I don't believe he exists.

 

What I'm saying, is that those who believe in god must consider one of two things.

 

1) God created nature and placed it beyond his control and therefore also placed our lives in the random hands of nature, therefore why worship him? For what reason? He's not protecting you, he won't intervene.

 

2) God did not create nature, but nature exists, so god doesn't exist.

 

You took me out of context. I'm not talking about creation. I'm talking about his personality, the nature of God.

 

Look at this for a second. Can we humans destroy things? We were created by man. Can we destroy things? Can we wage war?

 

Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes.

 

doesn't that mean there is a force that started that? If you believe that the big bang existed, howcome all the same material colled at different rates in a vacuum? How can that be explained? How did the Hydrogen come together specifically to form stars? Why invest your belief in somthing so illogical?

 

Are there not convection currents? Do we really understand the whole world? The universe? You cannot base the evidence of an omnipotent being by just looking at one aspect of creation.

 

But there's no evidence for the existence of a god. There are certain things we cannot accomplish because of physical constraints, but we have evidence for those, whether it be theoretical or material.

 

There is. Why can't we explain away that every single cultural and historical detail in the Bible is confirmed by Historical evidence found by secular and mostly atheistic archaeologists?

 

So you're saying that laws just exist. Can you give a good explanation of how these laws came into being?

 

Yes. Natural laws in this case exist because the planet's surface crust is divided into tectonic plates which move, when the stress builds us, they move suddenly, causing an earthquake which shifts the seabed, which alters the water, which results in a tsunami.

 

No. The law of thermodynamics was in place during the Big Bang according to the Big Bang theory. Why can't you explain the existance of these laws? BTW convection is theory. You're not referring to laws. What you're suggesting is that plate tectonics is a law. It's not. It's theory based on Alfred Wegener's theory of Continental drift coupled with deep-ocean radar scans. How did Boyle's law come to be about? why is it that direct relationship? Why not something else? There is a pattern to everything. These patterns suggest a maker or a designer.

 

They theoretically can control hurricanes. However, we can create tsumanis and earthquakes, and convection currents that are cause by natural law.

 

We could cause an earthquake, and a tsunami. But we wouldn't create either that would kill thousands of people.

 

Yes. we can. A Nuclear War head detonated in the Challenger's Deep could cause an Earthquake so powerful you couldn't imagine. BTW Challenger's Deep is lined with enriched uranium that would augment the explosion along one of the largest faults on the planet. This would be far worse than today's quake.

 

If we can, why can't God?

 

We "could", doesn't mean we will. Why not God? Because if he existed and he wanted to kill thousands of people, then he's a threat to the people of this planet. But he didn't, because IMO he does not exist.

 

Do we deserve our lives? How many of those people wanted to live another day. Is it your choice that other people live? But most importantly, did God do it or nature?

 

Who gave you that goal?

 

I did. By observing suffering that is taking place in the world, and deciding that we should resolve problems like that.

 

So are you the boss of everyone? Can you "resolve" "problems"? Are they problems? Is it really suffering?

 

If you look at the Bible, it's not a cop-out. Loook at our DNA. You're saying that the world is so random, we appeared, here, why do we all exist?

 

It's random in the sense that it occured naturally, but now we've evolved to this state, we can give ourselves purpose.

 

That's not the point. How did DNA occur naturally? Why do we exist? One mistake in our genome could allow for trisomy 21 (down's syndrom). IT is not just a coincidence that we have biological spellcheckers built into our DNA.

 

One deletion, or addition of a nucleotide basis can cause a frame shift. This one base can turn you into a pile of goo. The proteins would sequence wrong. One base. Would randomness create a spellchecker?

 

In a sense yes, because through randomness, it came up with us, and we develop our own "spellcheckers" over time, whether that being medicine, technology etc.

 

So does randomness adapt? I don't think so. That would mean is wouldn't be randomness. You're saying the universe is getting more orderly. That is very much against the second law of thermodynamics.

 

The Bible itself in Revalations shows that GOD can cause earthquakes, control locusts, etc. IF YOU READ THE BIBLE I THINK YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND.

 

I think you need to step out of the Bible from time to time. If God existed and he could create those things, then he's a enemy. I don't think humanity needs god to create earthquakes or control locusts. If he existed, we would need him to spare us from those things.

 

And you don't have to use full caps. I can read normal text.

 

The reason he caused them was because man said that He wasn't existant.

 

God lets you have the volition to decide what you want to do. He has given you a purpose, but many choose not to accept it.

 

No he doesn't. If a child is born with a terrible disease or illness, they didn't choose to be that way, unless your god wants their purpose to be a life of suffering?

 

But is it suffering?

 

What does that have to do with God? That is inflicted by people.

 

Exactly, I'm saying that's why so many people died.

 

The whole point of this thread came from my statement saying that telling people god is looking for the victims of this disaster is ridiculous, because god must have created the tsunami which killed people in the first place.

 

How many times do I have to repeat that?

 

did God create it or was it laws of nature that killed them that God created? Remember, he can create things that destroy like us.

 

Look at this perspective: Why do we build in places where there is geographic risk? The risk has been there for thousands of years. If you live there, you accept it.

 

If you use that logic, then we should not give money to people suffering from famine? Because they settle in areas of poor farming?

 

But religious people are supposed to be charitable. So which one is it? Charitable or ruthless?

 

Is it that ruthless? cna't you move to places with better conditions?If you're hot in the kitchen, wouldn't you go somewhere cooler? It's not ruthlessness, it's logic. I never said anything about withholding chairty. The reason people give to charity is to help needy people move to places in the physical world or in the social ladder (in the Marxist point of view). We don't give to charities because we think addicts should smoke on a street corner and stay in filthy condition and waste the charitable donations.

 

Do you dictate divine standards?

 

"Man" generally does, since I believe human beings created myths such as god.

 

You just said you are god.

 

Its just contradictory.

 

Many religions are dualistic. Christianity states that evil was first incarnated in Lucifer, the most beautiful of angels, a seraphim. He decided that he was too proud for God. He decided he was better than God. He then became Satan. God lets him have a chance to tempt man. He wants man to choose between himself and Satan. God gave us the chance through Jesus, the son in the trinity. He gave us the chance to escape from sin through his cleansing power. He gives us the chance of eternal life. That is what Christianity is about.

 

Yes, Christianity is full of great stories. But that's all they are.

 

If it was a real occurance God wanted to, he could have just destroyed Satan, since he was only an angel. But he let him live to cause misery for humans, so god needs to sort out his priorities.

 

So nobody gets volition? If you were god, you wouldn't give choices? What are your priorities? Adam and Eve chose the way of sin, we live in that consequence. they had the chance to live in Eden forever, but they chose to disobey God and follow the ways of sin. They chose. We suffer the consequences. He didn't cause the misery. We did.

 

Most of what you point out for evidence for no God is due to the point that we can't explain why those things that we can cause occur. My explanation is as good as yours. Can you explain how those things can occur randomly? That is the only option if you were to believe there is no God.

 

I do believe there is no God. Certain diseases occur for very real reasons, just as genetic flaws and such, which medical research will overcome hopefully, given enough funding and research. If we cure them, that will be OUR accomplishment, not that of a god being.

 

I never said that they were of a God being. They are our accomplishments through our volition. God provided that volition. Is randomness your substitute for God? You believe that randomness created the universe, the superclusters of glaxies, made the three laws of thermodynamics and gravity contant, and yet still made a spellchecker following the DNA and RNA polymerase? I don't think that's random. Yet A=T, C=G/ Chargaff came up with that. but how could the fixed amounts of cytosine, guanine, adenine, and thymine come out of randomness? Your train of thought is totally illogical.

 

Who says that God has to do stuff for you?

 

Why not? If he alledgedly created people, then let them suffer?

 

are we deserving of life? Why doesn't God let us suffer?. Stereotypes of God and Christian love aren't effective arguments. Could the earthquakes bring about something better? Did you ever consider that?

 

He gave you the chance for eternal life.

 

No he didn't. When did this choice present itself?

 

John 3:16

 

look it up in the Bible.

 

I was given no choice for eternal life.

 

Why do we deserve to exist?

 

Because we want to. We take our future into our own hands as much as possible.

 

So the wants of the limited human outweigh anything an omnipotent God says? Who says it's our future? Such a selfish point of view :(

 

Are we that selfish?

 

Yes. We want to live, but we are also capable of great generousity.

 

Couldn't that generosity be brought about by great catastrophes like this one?

 

Do we even deserve life?

 

Yes, unless some people present a danger to others, then they may need to be taken out.

 

We all pose a danger to one another. I have the ability to kill people if I sleep walk. I have the ability to kill people if I drive a car. Anything can pose a threat. Did you know that too much water can kill you? Why don't we get rid of water? Oh wait, we'd die.

 

Did God kill them?

 

No.

 

Then why are you blaming God?

 

Or did natural laws that God created kill them?

 

No. He did not create them. I don't believe he exists, therefore I don't think he created anything.

 

Then why are you blaming him?

 

The natural laws did.

 

That's right, but they weren't created by a god.

 

So why blame God?

 

If we can kill and murder each other, is God murdering the people?

 

No, because he didn't create us. When people kill and murder others, we deal with those people under our own laws.

 

but you said everything was created by randomness. So randomness kills and creates things. I don't see that happening. I see patterns, not randomness in reality.

 

NO! You would never say that. Isn't it the same for those laws that he created?

 

No, because there was no "he" to create anything.

 

So your evidence that my evidence is wrong is your word? You can best give me your word? I gave you science to back up what I said. can you come up with a logical argument that could hold up in a debate tournament? I want common sense, not something off the top of your head. Something logical.

292708[/snapback]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, all you offer is your opinion that if suffering exists then God must be evil.

 

Of course. That's all anyone offers.

 

Allowing suffering is not the same as causing suffering.

 

Well, the difference is slight. Very slight.

 

 

In the same vein - why if God exists - must He eliminate evil?

 

If part of the purpose of this life were to learn to choose between good and evil we must have evil to be able to make an informed choice.

 

But why allow people to choose evil? Because they inflict pain on others. The more sensible option for good would have been to not create evil at all, and people would be happy, since if people choose evil, they make life difficult for those who don't.

 

As for suffering (which is not the same as evil) we may experience it because we made a choice before we came to this Earth that we believed in agency or the right to choose and we were willing to accept the consequences that go with freedom.

 

I never made that choice. Who made that choice for me? What right do they have to do so?

 

If God did not allow us to act freely we would be puppets rather than beings of free will.

 

But the bible says were are all born as sinners.

 

I'm not a sinner. I haven't caused pain to others, I've haven't inflicted suffering on people. I haven't sinned. How could I have sinned before I was born? I was given a choice to be a sinner before I was born, therefore I wasn't born with free will.

 

And as hard as it is to believe I have heard many people relate how personal tragedies have strenghtened them or made them better people.

 

Good for them. That's wonderful. Doesn't mean I want to go through personal tragedies for the sake of learning a lesson. I am a good person. I don't need to suffer to make me a better one.

 

an extremely improbable occurence hence the gambling reference (according to Carl Sagan the probability of life evolving on any particular planet is extremely low)

 

Not necessarily improbable. We evolved here, so it's certainly possible.

 

So Carl Sagan, who is a life form says that chances of life occuring on a planet are low?

 

That's like me saying, the chances of myself being able to type on this keyboard, despite the fact I'm doing it right now.

 

Yes we can decide anything we want but there is nothing intrinsically right or wrong about anything and if the majority decides to believe in slavery or infanticide by your definition that would be right because that is what people chose to do.

 

Sure there is. Changing times bring different social opinions on what is right or wrong. Now, slavery certainly existed at one time, but the Bible itself can be found to support such a thing. Social attitudes change. The Bible talks about killing homosexuals, doesn't mean it has to happen now does it? Part of our laws protect certain rights, so even if a majority wanted something that could be considered "wrong", doesn't mean it's going to happen.

 

Good and evil can not exist as an absolute value if their value is determined by changing public opinion.

 

Neither can it be decided by the alledged existance of a god being which no has no evidence whatsoever to prove it's existance.

 

The difference is that some people have trust in themselves that they do the right thing, rather than depending on a god to make it all right with a grand design.

 

Well, as you yourself stated God did not send the tsunami - it is an occurence of the natural (ie physical) laws that govern this planet.

 

He did not, because he doesn't exist.

 

However, God can help individuals find peace in suffering - and I've heard a great many testimonials from people who have experienced that.

 

That's good for them. But once they've thought about it, I'm sure some of them may question why a god they may have had faith in, decided to allow (if not inflict) a tsunami to kill their loved ones.

 

That's a nice definition but throughout history people have other definitions - some of them not so nice and there's nothing to stop it from happening again.

 

That's right. Many times people have caused great suffering while using the excuse of "improvement". But I'm not talking about eugenics and concentration camps. My idea on improvement is entirely peaceful, for the most part.

 

Don't forget, many people have been tortured and killed for not believing in god or adhering to a certain religion.

 

So it works both ways.

 

No one ever said He liked or enjoyed the suffering of His children but He let us make a choice - which was to come to this Earth and accept the dangers it offers.

 

First of all, I am not one of it's children. This god being you believe in is not my father or my mother.

 

Secondly, I never made any choice. So if I didn't, then I don't have free will.

 

We could have never left His presence and continued in peace, harmony etc.

 

How do you know? Do you have no belief in humanity?

 

To say He must intervene and not allow us to accept those or else be deemed evil is IMO, shortsighted.

 

I disagree. I think it's very logical. If he is benevolent, then why create such occurances in nature that can kill massive amounts of humans, OR create natural laws that can create occurances in nature that can kill massive amounts of humans?

 

IMO, evil would be to not allow us to experience this Earth and forego the opportunities that come after this life because we might experience pain in the process.

 

If there is a heaven, then why live? Why not just die now and go to heaven to be with your god? Why live a life with the threat of evil? If your god removed evil and suffering not caused by humans, the world would already be paradise. Then, you live life in happiness instead of waiting until after death.

 

It's like a parent never letting their child try things like swimming, gymnastics or walking in open field because they might hurt themselves in the process. They very well might - but is the benefit derived from those activities worth the risk?

 

That doesn't apply. A child decides to go swimming presumably, and their parents give them their permission, so consent is given from child and parents. I never gave my permission for your god to inflict pain on people or allow it to happen.

 

Where was my free will? Where was my choice?

 

3. That God offered us an opportunity to come to the Earth, live a mortal life

 

When? He's never offered me an opportunity to do so.

 

and experience physical hardships - we accepted the offer and the risks because we believed the reward was worth the risk (a sort of cost/benefit analysis).

 

Who accepted? I didn't. Don't I have free will?

 

For God to subsequently intervene would show disregard for our right to choose and possible deny us the opportunities that lie ahead.

 

He didn't give us a right to choose, because he's never asked me.

 

And did those poor people who died most violently yesterday accept the dangers of being hit by a tsunami? I seriously doubt that.

 

Modern Man is partly Responsible for the Global Warming ("with the stuff that comes from Cars and Factories")mind u there was also the Natural Fluctation of Global Warming and Ice Ages throughout the Earths Long History but the other Disasters are because the Earth is always slowing moving so the Earth is responsibile for the Earthquakes not God.

 

That's right.

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doesn't that mean there is a force that started that?

 

Yes. A natural formation of the universe.

 

If you believe that the big bang existed, howcome all the same material colled at different rates in a vacuum?

 

I don't know, I wasn't there at the time.

 

How can that be explained?

 

At this point, it can't.

 

How did the Hydrogen come together specifically to form stars?

 

Gravity.

 

Then it's a chemical reaction. They come together and fuse. The nuclear reaction creates a star.

 

Why invest your belief in somthing so illogical?

 

Why do you consider it illogical?

 

I can look into the sky right now and see stars. I can't look up and see a god.

 

With powerful enough instruments, you can see evidence of the expansion of the universe, which shows that at one point, it originated from one point.

 

Are there any instruments that can detect your god? Any at all?

 

Or do you literally believe in the words of the Bible?

 

There is. Why can't we explain away that every single cultural and historical detail in the Bible is confirmed by Historical evidence found by secular and mostly atheistic archaeologists?

 

Cultural and historic details do not mean that there was a god at work. Jesus may have been a real man, but there's zero evidence to say he was the son of a god being.

 

No. The law of thermodynamics was in place during the Big Bang according to the Big Bang theory.

 

That's great.

 

Why can't you explain the existance of these laws?

 

Because I'm not a Cosmologist. I don't need to be. I can't personally explain how brain surgery is carried out, but I know it is carried out.

 

There is a pattern to everything. These patterns suggest a maker or a designer.

 

No, they don't. If that were true, then god would be responsible for the earthquake, since he designed it right? So something he created or designed was responsible for thousands of deaths. So he's responsible? or did he give tectonic plates free will too?

 

Yes. we can. A Nuclear War head detonated in the Challenger's Deep could cause an Earthquake so powerful you couldn't imagine.

 

I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to do such a thing.

 

BTW Challenger's Deep is lined with enriched uranium that would augment the explosion along one of the largest faults on the planet. This would be far worse than today's quake.

 

Like I said, only stupid people would do that.

 

Do we deserve our lives?

 

Yes.

 

How many of those people wanted to live another day.

 

About 14, 000

 

Is it your choice that other people live?

 

Sadly not.

 

But most importantly, did God do it or nature?

 

Nature did it.

 

What I am saying is that it was a natural event which killed many people. It wasn't god because I don't believe he exists.

 

So are you the boss of everyone?

 

No.

 

Can you "resolve" "problems"?

 

No, but some people can.

 

Are they problems?

 

Yeah.

 

Is it really suffering?

 

Of course.

 

That's not the point. How did DNA occur naturally?

 

Ask a geneticist.

 

Why do we exist?

 

IMO, to live and make the world a better place for the good of humanity.

 

One mistake in our genome could allow for trisomy 21 (down's syndrom). IT is not just a coincidence that we have biological spellcheckers built into our DNA.

 

Eventually, I'm sure we will solve that particular problem. Medical research is proceeding.

 

So does randomness adapt? I don't think so.

 

Not randomness itself, but rather it's consequences. Random mutations allowed survival of the fittest and those attributes that gave certain species the advantage survived.

 

That would mean is wouldn't be randomness.

 

Like, I said, it's not the "randomness" itself, but the effects of it.

 

The reason he caused them was because man said that He wasn't existant.

 

So he's vengeful? So he punishes people for doubting him?

 

He sounds so loving and gentle.

 

But is it suffering?

 

Certainly.

 

Is it that ruthless?

 

Yes.

 

cna't you move to places with better conditions?

 

Not necessarily, not all the planet is suitable for life on a large scale. The mass movement of people from one place to another in a short time could cause even more death and hunger.

 

If you're hot in the kitchen, wouldn't you go somewhere cooler? It's not ruthlessness,

 

But the world isn't a kitchen either.

 

it's logic.

 

Flawed logic.

 

I never said anything about withholding chairty.

 

But they deserved it right? They lived in those places, they knew the risks right?

 

They had free will?

 

The reason people give to charity is to help needy people move to places in the physical world or in the social ladder (in the Marxist point of view).

 

Should those 14, 000 people have moved before this disaster? Who's going to fund that? You? Would you house some of those people? What did you do you for them before they died? What will you do now?

 

We don't give to charities because we think addicts should smoke on a street corner and stay in filthy condition and waste the charitable donations.

 

I'm talking about people killed in a tsunami. You're talking about drug addicts?

 

You just said you are god.

 

Don't be silly.

 

So nobody gets volition?

 

They would get it, but they wouldn't get a tsunami either.

 

If you were god, you wouldn't give choices?

 

Yeah, but I'd spare you the earthquakes.

 

.....and locusts.

 

What are your priorities?

 

Health and happiness.

 

Adam and Eve chose the way of sin, we live in that consequence.

 

That's their problem, not mine. I didn't authorise them to make choices for me.

 

they had the chance to live in Eden forever, but they chose to disobey God and follow the ways of sin.

 

Again, that's their problem.

 

They chose. We suffer the consequences.

 

I don't want to suffer the consequences for their mistakes.

 

He didn't cause the misery.

 

We did.

 

I didn't cause it. I wasn't there. Adam and Eve never consulted me.

 

Your train of thought is totally illogical.

 

Just like yours then.

 

are we deserving of life?

 

Sure we are.

 

Why doesn't God let us suffer?.

 

Because he doesn't exist.

 

Stereotypes of God and Christian love aren't effective arguments.

 

I raised no stereotypes.

 

Could the earthquakes bring about something better? Did you ever consider that?

 

Hmmmmm.

 

Let me think. Earthquake = Tsunami = Mass death.

 

Yeah, I guess that might be better. B)

 

Are you insane?

 

So the wants of the limited human outweigh anything an omnipotent God says?

 

Yes, because I don't believe we are so limited as you might think.

 

And I don't believe in your omnipotent god.

 

Who says it's our future? Such a selfish point of view 

 

It's about as selfish as your preaching that Adam and Eve made a choice for every human that alledgely followed them into existance.

 

Couldn't that generosity be brought about by great catastrophes like this one?

 

Of course. But I'm sure the people who have lost family would rather their relatives didn't die.

 

We all pose a danger to one another.

 

I pose no intentional danger to anyone.

 

I have the ability to kill people if I sleep walk.

 

I can't help it if you have homicidal tendencies.

 

I have the ability to kill people if I drive a car.

 

Then drive safely.

 

Anything can pose a threat.

 

Depends how it's used.

 

Did you know that too much water can kill you?

 

Yes I did.

 

Why don't we get rid of water? Oh wait, we'd die.

 

We don't need to get rid of it. Not everyone is as dangerous as you seem to be.

 

Then why are you blaming God?

 

I'm not. There is no god to blame.

 

Then why are you blaming him?

 

Blame who?

 

So why blame God?

 

Which god?

 

but you said everything was created by randomness.

 

To a point.

 

So randomness kills and creates things.

 

No it doesn't. Aside from natural occurances. But through human ingenuity, we can do our best to prevent such deaths.

 

I don't see that happening. I see patterns, not randomness in reality.

 

Good for you.

 

So your evidence that my evidence is wrong is your word?

 

I'm saying that you've presented no evidence. Most of your questions to me have bordered on insanity.

 

You can best give me your word?

 

And 14,000 examples of why god does not exist.

 

Though that number may grow overnight.

 

I gave you science to back up what I said. can you come up with a logical argument that could hold up in a debate tournament?

 

Yes. "God does not exist, because if he did, he would have prevented the deaths of thousands of people yesterday"

 

Other arguments would flow from that.

 

I want common sense,

 

Hopefully, you will develop some in time.

 

not something off the top of your head.

 

No, from INSIDE my head, not on top.

 

That would be my hair.

 

Something logical.

 

I'm still waiting for something logical from you.

 

You claim to use so many examples of science and logic, then you completely ruin all that by arguing that Adam and Eve made the choices for humanity in the garden of Eden?

 

Now THAT'S illogical. :(

Edited by The King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

King, I think you're missing the point on the concept of "right" and "wrong" it doesn't matter what a society decides is "right" - there is nothing intrinsically right or wrong if our creation is merely the occurence of chance - what that means is that the definition can change with every whim of society.

 

If you don't believe in God that is certainly a valid opinion but what I have a problem with is your logic. You say that God can only exist if He behaves in a certain way - a way you decided a God should act. It's the why a god should act in a certain way that fails in logic.

 

As for free will and choice - that was a decision your spirit made before you came to this Earth and the fact that you are here indicates you consented to come here. I do not expect you to believe or accept this. But I did expect you to try to understand the logic.

 

What you have failed to answer is what you think the purpose of life should be if there was a god. What would be the point in us coming here and experiencing nothing but good times as you indicate would be the case if God did exist. What is the purpose? I know your answer will be there is no purpose because God doesn't exist. But at the same time you keep offering if God did exist He wouldnt' allow suffering so you must have some underlying concept of what the purpose of life would be if there was a God and that is what I'm trying to discover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't read every post, I have too much on my mind right now, but I'm going to give my answer to the big question...

 

As the topic of this thread asks, "Is God resposible for natural disaster?"

 

My answer... If there is no God, then obviously no. If there is a God (or Goddess), then both yes AND no. Some natural disasters could be created by God in order to punish certain people, like when He sent the plagues on Egypt so that Pharoah would free the Jews. But some natural disasters just occur, thanks to the forces of nature that God made. So, I guess, those disasters could be considered to have been created by God indirectly, but I doubt God said, "Okay, I think a tornado will hit such-and-such trailor park in Arkansas this Friday at exactly 7:17 PM." If he exists, I think it's more likely that He set down these laws of nature and then sat back and watched to see what would happen. Or, some would say, He sat back and let happen what would happen naturally.

Edited by wishfire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez, so many quotes in posts, I can barely see where one begins and the other ends! Well, not really but since there are so many I'm not going to bother quoting other posts or dissecting others, I'll just respond to the topic, and maybe include some other things that stuck out in the previous posts.

 

First, was God responsible? No, I don't believe so. Take into account that just becasue God created the earth, universe, and all the natural laws, does not mean that he is responsible for the tsunami. If you remember from the Bible, Jesus was asked about why a tower had fallen and killed a group of people. Why did they deserve such a thing? Jesus pointed out that God did not send the tower to smite this group, but that time and unforseen occurrance befall all of us, God is not just sending things our way to get some sort of cruel pleasure out of it. So then why is stuff, like wars, crime, disease, etc happening if God can prevent an occurrance or wipe such a thing from the earth forever?

 

He can, but what would that prove? The reason that the world is in such a state is because of the rebellion of Adam and Eve in Eden, instigated by Satan. The issue behind the whole occurrance was soverignty, could man live separate from God? Now, maybe God could have reasoned that since these three defied Him, perhaps he should destroy them and maybe start again. But would that prove anything? Would the issue of soverignty be resolved? No, it would demonstrate God's power but still wouldn't resolve the issue. It would be like a government putting down a rebellion. The government has the power to quell the rebellion but is that government the best? So, God has allowed mankind to rule himself, with what result. Man dominating man to his injury, with God taking a laisse-faire approach sometimes, but also sometimes interveneing when it furthers His purpose. Also, take into account that the Bible says that Satan has been evicted from heaven, and so now is on the earth, like a "roaring lion seeking to devour someone" and "misleading the entire inhabited earth." Satan also at this time is described as the "ruler of the world."

 

So just because time and unforseen occurrance happen, it does mean that God is responsible. What we can look forward to is the future when God will step in and right the wrongs that we all have to deal with, like evil, sickness, and death. It's all in the Bible so I encourage you all to check it out. :(

 

Ok, I guess my post is ready for dissection now. ::takes a step back to watch::

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this