Dear God...

[Icemaster]

Who is this "God" of which you all speak.....?

[Seahawk]

Originally posted by Superman
Some things have to be believed to be seen. Kang's perspective on this is from an angle that conceals a portion of the view that we see, Jeff. You know this.

This current curiosity, this question about why doesn't God stop human misery, is related to the curiosity about why the Pope does not throw condoms from his motorcade. God, and the Pope, are not concerned with peoples' physical health or even their happiness or well-being. They are concerned about peoples' souls. And quite frankly, physical health and spiritual health are somewhat negatively correlated.

We're all going to get sick and die. That's the setup already. God designed this place so that we get old, sick and we die. Plug that into your computer program and see what comes out. If God thought that a pox, like HIV for instance, would bring people closer to Him, then the pox would be a good thing. The length of a physical life is insignificant. The degree of happiness is, even more so, insignificant. What is significant is the shape of our soul at the time of our death. And if misery makes that soul more beautiful ( and it usually does have this effect ), then give me misery.

It seems to very basic and easy to understand. Makes one wonder why this is so difficult for folks like Kang. Except that we know the answer to that too don't we, Jeff? Kang's viewpoint is a decision.

Supe.

I often find your posts dense, but I always read them. This one is my reward.

[Superman]

Thank you, Hawk. That means a lot to me. Really.

[Turbo_pro]

Originally posted by kang
.................................edit............. ...................
Why doesn’t god heal amputees?
....................................edit.......... .......................

I think we're all tiring of the amputee argument.

The miracle for the amputee is that the removal of the limb has generally allowed for the continuation of a life.
The prayer was answered when the person loosing the limb ask to be saved and the removal of the limb did just that.
Now you want to go back and change that miracle?

God moves forward and to ask him to change the past because you don't get it seems arrogant.

Payer quite often works by bringing calm to an anxious situation. Calm decision making in crisis should be a blessing in itself. Payer gets you out of your own head and focused on the problem. By reading some of these posts it's easy to see that being in your head alone is a dangerous place to be.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally posted by kang
You will no doubt answer why my trials and tribulations have not brought me to god with “you have not been chosen.”

"No doubt", huh? You make a lot of baseless assumptions. You actually could not be further off on this one. Go ahead and convince yourself you know what I would say to any given point you raise. You have been quite universally wrong up to this point. You are lumping me in with your perceived stereotype of Christians; a stereotype clearly born of theological ignorance mixed liberally with a good deal of prejudice.

Originally posted by kang
You say I have closed my mind to the theological answers, but I would say you have closed your mind to the common sense answers.

Actually, I think I have adequately demonstrated elswhere that my mind is open to "both" answers. You have demonstrated quite convincingly that yours is not. You divide the "theological" from the "common sense" while readily admitting you don't know one hell of a lot about the theological. You debate a subject in which you have admitted limited knowledge. I guess that doesn't keep you from having well-formed opinions about it, though.

I think I'm gaining some measure of additional insight into what makes the common atheist tick. If you are any example, it appears to be the same thing that makes the common Christian tick. A less than cursory understanding of the basic tenets of "the other side". A somewhat more complete understanding of the basic tenets of "your side", although falling well short of the recognized "experts". An unwillingness to explore "the other side", because you already feel as though you know enough about it to make an informed choice. A respected "leadership" on your side that says the other side is bad. You can't understand all of their justifications for their claims, but you buy into them none the less. Granted, there are those on both sides whose knowledge of both their own and the other side's arguments are either greatly above or below the norm, but I'm addressing the "average Joe". The similarities are remarkable.

Again, if you would like to speak intelligently about theology, like any other somewhat complex topic, it would behoove you to do one thing first. Go learn about it. It is very frustrating to try to carry on a conversation with one who desires to discuss subject matter with which he is not familiar. It really bogs down the whole process. You are making incorrect assumptions, basing challenges upon your own missunderstandings, and finally holding fast to some very unfortunate stereotypes. This topic seems to interest you. Follow that interest and explore it.

[Dennis Kalma]

+1 to Jeff and Superman...

And just a minor point about "the physicians skill was learned in school" point....

Where did the brain, the intelligence, the physical dexterity come from? Who caused the surgeon to be born into a situation where he could take advantage of those skills and talents? Who kept him from being hit by that school bus when he wasn't paying attention one afternoon?

I think if we realize that we have been given a set of skills or talents, and we are expected to use them to do good in this world, starting at home, then we may begin to knock down the "me" generation that is the scourge of our times.

Dennis

PS - just to be clear....I am a fiscal conservative, social conservative, fundamentalist Christian who has a liberal outlook and tolerance for the "human condition".

[livi]

Jeff,

Some of the statements in your original post are definitely sad facts about our race´s degenerate behavior. However, putting it in a context where the lack of God and religion equals lack of ethics and moral is elitist and quite frankly rather narrow minded. As a whole, the text has a point - but God and religion have nothing to do with it.

Ethics, moral and behavior are inherent traits of the human race - with or without God.

Where did you find that text?

Disclaimer: I may of course have misunderstood the whole meaning of the text. In that case - well, just ignore me.

[Dennis Kalma]

Livi, I agree with you to a considerable degree. Some of the finest, most moral people I know are aethiest or at least strongly agnostic....and unfortunately some of the worst scumbags I know are in church, singing hosanna's with the best of them.

I don't care what label you give yourself or what label society gives you, I don't care what colour God painted your skin or where he placed in you the world...I'll assess you by what you do, what you say and what intent I can discern from your words and actions.

In the case of the aethiest and the churchgoer, in both cases, I believe they will be judged for what they did after the end of their lives and it is not my business to do the judging. I also think that any God smart enough to create this world is also probably smart enough to understand the human condition and take all things into account.

My business is doing the best I can with what I have been given, be the best person I can to those I meet and have faith in the higher Being.

Laugh if you want, agree if you want....not my concern.

Dennis

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally posted by livi
Jeff,

Some of the statements in your original post are definitely sad facts about our race´s degenerate behavior. However, putting it in a context where the lack of God and religion equals lack of ethics and moral is elitist and quite frankly rather narrow minded. As a whole, the text has a point - but God and religion have nothing to do with it.

Ethics, moral and behavior are inherent traits of the human race - with or without God.

Where did you find that text?

Disclaimer: I may of course have misunderstood the whole meaning of the text. In that case - well, just ignore me.

Actually livi, you are the only one who understood the whole text. The "God" part of it merely served as a distraction to those always ready to jump down His throat. It's amazing how distracting He can be.

The moral decay of our society has nothing to do with God or the lack of a God. This thread serves to demonstrate how far we have progressed down the path where any mention of morality from a "religious" point of view is immediately attacked on "religious" grounds. The actual morals and ethics under discussion get lost. Too many folks will steer the discusion to keeping "God"out of it and completely ignore the moral and ethical questions at hand. They will actually fight against any moral or ethical stance that they perceive as being based upon "religion". Such is their distaste. They would sooner accept, or gloss over moral decay than concede to any point of view seen as "religious".

[Superman]

I would agree that ethical behavior is not caused by a belief in God. On the other hand, you, Markus, do not know that our ethical compass has nothing to do wth God. Indeed, there are those who make a fairly powerful argument that our innate feelings of love and responsibility to one another, our hard-wired conscience, is that part of us that is formed "in the image and likeness of God." It's a pretty fascinating position and argument and discussion. Of course, if someone has already made a decision to reject God-stuff, then that discussion is more disturbing than interesting. Again, this whole thing is a decision. A man can usually manage to justify his rejection of God. And another man can be at least as convinced of His existence. Once the decision is made, then the justification is assembled. You've probably noticed that believers appear to be wholly convinced of their position. Passionately. From that viewpoint, the evidence is massive overwhelming. But from the other position, those things cannot be seen.

[livi]

I agree, Superman. Nobody can claim their belief is the truth - the whole truth. It is a matter of choice. But there is clearly enough evidence that a religious individual or society is not automatically behaving according to a higher standard of ethics and moral than those who are not or less religious.

Quite frankly - IF the level of moral and ethics are instilled by God - I am not that impressed by the result..

[scottmandue]

Originally posted by livi
Quite frankly - IF the level of moral and ethics are instilled by God - I am not that impressed by the result..

God also gives use the free will to ignore morals and ethics.

[livi]

Originally posted by scottmandue
God also gives use the free will to ignore morals and ethics.

Good point, Scott!

Clearly demonstrates the inherent hopelessness of a debate of this kind where neither positive nor negative evidence can be truthfully claimed by either side.

[HardDrive]

Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
.

The moral decay of our society has nothing to do with God or the lack of a God. This thread serves to demonstrate how far we have progressed down the path where any mention of morality from a "religious" point of view is immediately attacked on "religious" grounds. The actual morals and ethics under discussion get lost. Too many folks will steer the discusion to keeping "God"out of it and completely ignore the moral and ethical questions at hand. They will actually fight against any moral or ethical stance that they perceive as being based upon "religion". Such is their distaste. They would sooner accept, or gloss over moral decay than concede to any point of view seen as "religious".

+5000.

I am an agnostic (I seem to find faith everytime my anti-lock brakes kick in ), but I whole heartedly agree with Jeff. Religion is used as a convenient target for the ultra left. Any discussion of instilling values in our children is shouted down as an attack on their 'lifestyles'.

My faith is weak at best, my wife is a Hindu, but our child will be starting school this fall at a Catholic School (Villa Academy). We want out child to have values, we want her to learn service to others. We want her to have empathy for others. Of course we are putting her at great risk of believing in God, and thats just down right child abuse.

[the]

Originally posted by Superman
Some things have to be believed to be seen.

So, so true.

They're called delusions.

Originally posted by Superman
God, and the Pope, are not concerned with peoples' physical health or even their happiness or well-being.

That's pathetic.

[trekkor]

Lurking...



KT

[nostatic]

Originally posted by HardDrive


My faith is weak at best, my wife is a Hindu, but our child will be starting school this fall at a Catholic School (Villa Academy). We want out child to have values, we want her to learn service to others. We want her to have empathy for others. Of course we are putting her at great risk of believing in God, and thats just down right child abuse.

So you want the school to teach her ethics and morals? I thought everyone said that is best learned at home.

And if you aren't Catholic, why would you send your kid to a Catholic school? Seems somewhat disingenuous to me, but ymmv. There are plenty of service opportunities in public school...at least there are in my son's school.

[Lothar]

Why God must be removed from public discourse:

1. If moral absolutes can be exclusively associated with God and religion, then they can be discounted under the perverted, and incorrect I might add, notion of separation of church and state. Then moral relativism can prevail and everyone can do what feels right to them.

2. If God is "The Creator", and rights are endowed by our creator, then removing God eliminates our individual rights. Then government is free to decide what rights people can have. Socialist and totalitarian government cannot be far.

[nostatic]

Which gods do we get to have in the public discourse?

[stuartj]

Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
Why would He want to?

We cannot see into others' hearts and souls. For the sake of argument, let's say God can. His mission is to bring everyone closer to Him. He uses the trials and tribulations of this life to do so. Our time here on earth isn't even a blip on His eternal time line. Assuming an afterlife (again, for the sake of argument) with (or without) Him, and that He is preparing folks for that, He may very well see that kind of hardship as a small price to pay for finding Him.

The somewhat childish reaction here in this life is "but that is not 'fair'". As a father, I used to hear that all the time from my young boys. What they saw, from their child-like point of view, seemed incredibly "unfair" to them, or even as a hardship. What I saw, from my fatherly point of view, was something that would mold and shape them as people; as better people. I see that as a very simple microcosm of what God does with His children here on earth.

I find it somewhat of an irony that very often the folks enduring these hardships are brought closer to God. The other people in their lives, or observing their live from afar as the case may be, are driven away from God by their perception of "unfairness". This perception tells them there cannot be a God; otherwise life would be more "fair". Mere children, they are. They, almost as a rule, squawk louder than the actual person or people suffering the "unfairness".

God is not "fair" by any means from our earthly point of view. He could really care less about our comfort and well-being while here on earth. This is the crucible in which He refines us; it is going to be "hard" for all of us, at one level or another. In the grand scheme of things, though, the time spent here is entirely inconsequential outside of the relationship you develop with Him.

Your rememberances of this life on earth will be as those you hold today of your early childhood. This life is a shadow of what is to come. You will look back upon what you now see as unfair hardships and realize they formed you into what you then will be. We will leave this world still as infants on our path to development and knowledge; what our Father allows us to experience here are the first baby steps on that path.

God is not fair, or anything else, Jeff. Because it is very unlikely that god exists. I cannot conclusively say god, or the faeries in my garden for that matter, doesnt exist ofcourse, but your proposition that this god exists and is so complex as to have created the universe and everything in it, and can at the same time monitor the concisuoness of all we humans and make judegments as to whether he will break his own cosmic rules (or not) when we ask- immeadiately poses the even BIGGER question....where did this god come from?

"Your rememberances of this life on earth will be as those you hold today of your early childhood. This life is a shadow of what is to come."

You know this how, Jeff? Superstitious, dangerous claptrap.

You are the perfect candidate for the Dawkins challenge Jeff. I dont think you are as far gone as Trekker or Doug. Read "the God Delusion."

Hell, I'll buy it for you.