Vivisector

Gamera, in view of some of your comments, I have to ask - does it seem to you that the world pretty much operates the way you'd expect if there were no benevolent deity involved in its activities?

V.

Sheshbazzar

This of course would require a massive divine intrusion and intervention into human affairs on a daily basis.
When a hate group such as the Neo-Nazis, or the KKK take to the streets and spew their venom, should the remedy be for YHWH to open up the earth and swallow them alive on the spot?
Or when a multi-millionaire executive, feeding his own greed, undertakes to destroy the jobs and livelihood for tens of thousands, with a stroke of his pen, should the remedy be an omnipotent being instantly incinerating him?
In either case, If they are allowed to live, there remains hope of redemption, in that they may yet learn the error of their ways, repent and make amends.
I hope you are not confusing facile with futile, but I for one, do not at all accept that optimism is "futile", having seen, heard, and experienced a lifetime of evidence to the contrary.
As far as pessimism, the old adage is, "Can't never did anything", because pessimism is self-defeating.
Whereas men of faith and of conviction, "CAN DO", and accomplish much humanitarian good, being filled with that optimism expressed in the saying; With the help of Elohim, all things are possible.
Actually, if you stop to think about it, most all of us DO to a degree, know the future, this is why we invest in life insurance policies, make "investments" and seek out employment that will provide our old age with a pension or assets.
Most who are able, draw on their knowledge and experience, and predicting a certain future, apply their assets to their own benefit and comfort.

If we are compassionate, we can also foresee certain predictable disasters that are looming for our fellow man, and have it within our power to warn, to help them to prepare, and to lend assistance when and where it is needed.
Comfortably wealthy people are optimistic when it comes to planning for their own advantage, but are thoroughly pessimistic only about the worth of helping out their fellow man.
"Pet theories" of scientists and wealthy men are cold comfort to them who are starving, or have lost everything they had, much better the hand of a stranger give to them a meal, assistance to get back on their feet, a word of comfort, and the right hand of human fellowship, as befits their brothers keeper.
"let it under your skin, then you can begin, to make it better"
The world is, what it is, but each of us have it within our power to make it a better place for others.

EthnAlln

I think we are actually not disagreeing here. I'm not saying that any human actions are incompatible with a benevolent god. It's the inhuman causes of suffering that I'm saying are incompatible. I certainly hope my perfect world is compatible with a benevolent deity, since you asked me to describe a world that I thought would be.

Just to be absolutely clear, human conflict, though it's horrible sometimes, is also the stuff of great tragedy. I'm not saying a good god would have created a world in which Shakespeare and Euripides had no material for their plays. To that extent, we certainly agree. And I think any thoughtful person who has read "Brave New World" would agree with us.

Anyway, this debate has been on your territory. I've taken on the role of the attacker, trying to show inconsistencies between the existing world and the hypothesis of a benevolent creator. You have been the defender of theism, just trying to show that the hypothesis isn't logically ruled out. Maybe next time we cross wits, you'll be in the position of proving that there is evidence of a good deity behind it all. Cheers.

EthnAlln

We don't disagree so far. As I wrote to Gamera, human wickedness doesn't disprove divine goodness.

Well, thanks for the sermon. I don't disagree with much of it. The main thing I take exception to is the statement that "to a degree" we know the future. The phrase isn't exact. What we know is a set of likely possibilities, but we are continually getting surprised by events we didn't expect.

But none of what you have said here contradicts anything I have said. My only assertion throughout this debate has been that if certain horrendous features of the world are demonstrably beyond human control (and they are) and a god is posited as the cause of everything, then that god cannot be benevolent.

As for optimism and pessimism, I don't see the connection that you do between behavior and attitude. I know many pessimists who are doing their best to make the world a better place, even though they expect to fail, and many optimists who are living lives of unrelieved selfishness.

spin

OK, so your weltangst is on the level of suffering of someone with cancer at age six. Ground control to Major Gamera... there's something wrong... can you hear me Major Gamera...?

Deep analysis followed by profound comment.

Hey, I stub my toe every now and then. Does that count?

I have not put myself into the equation. I have talked about people who actually do suffer, badly, without any choice. I don't mean this pissy little suffering that one does in Palm Springs. I'm talking about Darfur, Uganda, India. You're off the scale. Whose talking about avoiding suffering in Palm Springs?

He doesn't send money likewise.

Talking about confusion, I'm not looking at Bush for Bush, I'm looking at the people who are the brunt of the Bushes of the world, people who have no choice... such as those in Iraq who first suffered a Saddam Hussein, only to get invaded and have their conditions drastically worsened. It's the half a million children who died in Iraq because of big Bush and the dude with the cigar. It's the chaos that those people now live in in which children are being born and who, if they survive, will be crippled by the experience.

And like I said, you are not making sense.

Rubbish. You are wilfully misrepresenting what I have said. I want a world in which bilhazia doesn't kill people; malaria, tuberculosis, George W. Bush, cholera, trypanosomiasis... don't kill people. These are not a matter of physical limitations or free will.

You persist in ad hominem then don't like being called on it. Saintly, very saintly.


spin

Toto

This discussion has left Biblical Criticism for more philosophical themes. Please bring it back to the question of the cruelty of the Biblical depiction of God, or let me know where you want it split off and moved.

Gamera

[QUOTE=EthnAlln][QUOTE=Gamera]


My point is to focus on what you see as the alternative world in which there is no inhuman causes of suffering. It seems to me that would entail not being embedded in a phsycial world of limits, and thus this destroys our humanity as surely as does taking away our freewill. Maybe you can address this. Surely getting rid of a few diseases (something we have in fact done), is not the full issue of inhuman suffering. You're really questioning the issue of being embedded in a world that has things like gravity in it. Your alternative? And if you have none, then the issue doesn't go against a benevolent God.

Never, Ethn, never. You won't see me trying to "prove" the existence of God or trying to argue you into faith. I think that's contrary to the gospel. Paul teaches that the gospel saves, not theological arguments. The gospel is about an existential choice, not about historical facts or theological doctrine.

Romans 1:16 - For I am not ashamed of the gospel: it is the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith,

Gamera

[QUOTE=spin]

Sure they are. You want a world where people don't do bad things. I.e., they don't have free will. No thanks.

And you want a world where bad things don't happen. I.e., no physical limitations, like gravity dragging you to your death from a cliff. Again no thanks. There's no room for HUMAN existence in that world.

Toto

OK, but the gospel Jesus affirmed the Hebrew Scriptures, which depict YHWH as commanding various acts of cruelty.

If you think that the HS were just stories, what was their point? Why are they holy?

That's the question for this thread, not the cruelty of a Deistic god.

TomboyMom

#3 human conduct which is commanded or believed to be commanded by God. Your may not be able to blame God, since he doesn't exist, but you can blame all the people who believe in him, especially the one who commands his followers to slay all the Xites, just for having the temerity to live on land he wants to give to his followers.