Arvel Joffi

Job: Deceived by action, if not by word, and betrayed by God.

Arvel Joffi

I figured if God was any good at creating, he would've created something worthwhile.

wildernesse

My reply is: Maybe, maybe not. I'd have to know more about the circumstances of the actions of the two people. Plus, I'd have to take into account that I can't know the future and to affect billions of people--as in, two people do something and the immediate consequence is the Earth is destroyed--is extremely rare.

If the thing is: two people do something and billions of people *could* suffer from their mistake in the course of human history, then I don't know what I would do. The suffering isn't assured--and you don't know if there will be other things(occurring from immediately to never) that will abate the suffering or even end it.

No real world example comes to my mind, but think about this: in your house you are hiding a family of political prisoners. The death squad shows up and demands that the couple come out or they will burn and pillage a shantytown of innocent people--unrelated to you or the people you hide. The people you hide will be tortured and killed--they don't want to leave the safety of your home. Do you boot them out the door to protect the shantytown people or do you protect your friends? What gives you the right to make that decision for them? When do the inalienable rights of the masses outweigh those same rights of individuals?

Is it ok for the poor and destitute to suffer in shantytowns and as peasant laborers and serfs because their overall pain/suffering is less than the great and bountiful good of other sectors of society?

Every individual has worth and meaning and deserves rights and freedoms--you don't prevent suffering by getting the most bang for your buck happiness wise and letting the chips fall where they may. Everyone, even the two individuals, has to have rights and value or else no one is safe anyway.

--tibac

wildernesse

Regarding your "Note"--you'd probably get more constructive replies sooner if you didn't antagonize the people you're asking with your disclaimer.

Most people on the threads you linked to sensed a trap--and they weren't going to step in it. (Although I feel that their willingness to say "Well if God did it, then it's right/good/moral and I'm not going to question it." disturbing.)

A less antagonistic way might be to have said, What do YOU think about this question, and then reply to any Bible with, OK but what do YOU think? You still might not have gotten much, of course. Plus, I'm not sure if that's your style.

Also, telling me not to use Bible quotes just made me want to.

--tibac

Radorth

Add this option and I will vote.

Only if said billions of people learned nothing from their mistakes.

Rad

Bree

Who will be the judge of what is a "mistake" and what is not?

Proxima Centauri

You're making unproved assertions yet again, Gemma Therese. You can't prove that there is a creator God or that Happyboy is a creature.


Gemma Therese, Irrational; Infidels Rational.

B.Shack

Proxima Centauri

Darling Gemma said Anyone can be more moral than something that doesn't exist.
What happyboy means is that he is more moral than the Christian concept of God. If such an entity were to exist most humans would be more moral than it.

Amos

Gemma Therese: Inspired and therefore non-rational.

Infidels: Must employ reason and therefore rational and irrational.

Proxima Centauri

No merciful God would allow Hell to exist.