Jack the Bodiless

luvluv:

Are you a Deist?

Because you seem to be talking about the non-interventionist God of Deism, who sets up the Universe and then just watches it "do its own thing".

It might be true that this is the best possible Universe that could be made in this fashion. But God could make it better by intervening. If Ebola was an inevitable consequence of evolution, God could step in to eradicate it. If suffering caused by predators or parasites sometimes serves a useful purpose, God could intervene to switch off the pain (or cause instant, painless death) where suffering serves NO useful purpose, or create a mechanism that does this automatically. And this would not deny us "free will".

Note that this Universe, described as the product of a benevolent God, could just as easily be the product of a purely malevolent God if intervention is not allowed. Maybe this Universe is the most horrible one that could exist without actually causing the extinction of humanity (which would end our suffering, and is hence undesirable for a truly malevolent deity), and the only reason it isn't any more horrible is that we have evolved to handle it and God can't intervene to make it any worse?

Can you refute the claims of someone who insists that this is the WORST of all possible worlds?

If not, then why should we believe that this is the BEST of all possible worlds?

Hobbs

Not only that, these angels also apparently had the opportunity to exercise their free will to decide whether or not to follow God, and Lucifer along with a third of God's original angels in heaven exercised their free will by choosing to rebel against a god they knew existed and knew was powerful. And all that without any of the suffering we enjoy today.

Some who believe in heaven claim that the view includes seeing infidels roasting in hell. Those who claim this also tend to look forward to enjoying this view.

luvluv

HOBBS:

We're getting into purely doctrinal debates here. Let me just say that I trust God enough to know that He is fair and that at the end of the day (or age, if you will) no one will have any right to complain about not having had a fair chance. Having said that, there is some Biblical evidence for stating that there will be children in heaven. I don't know how their having access to God's existence will affect their free will. The Bible does speak of a period of time, AFTER the second coming and the ressurection, when Satan will be released for a season and will convince many people to follow him in a final rebellion. (Revelations 20 - 21 I believe) So apparently, some of the people who, either by premature birth or by virtue of having never heard the gospel, will be allowed to learn of God after death, but they will still have the free choice to not follow Him. I'm not sure exactly how that's going to work, it's not my job to know exactly how everything is going to work.

But however heaven works, I think it is obvious there are good reasons why suffering exists here.

HRG:

I've already answered that. Maybe you could explain to me what it is about my answer that you disagree with.

I'll have to stop you there. We don't know where angels came from or if they themselves had to go through some kind of character training before they were allowed into heaven. There are several denominations that speculate that angels are largely composed of dead saints. The bottom line is, we don't know, so the premise of your next two statements is faulty:

We don't know that he did.

Again, we don't know that. And also, I never said that proper moral character is required to enter into heaven, but it's certainly required if you're going to stay there.

We don't know that either. The bible reports that Satan and other angels rebelled against God.

But, I'm thinking, if you folks have retreated to doctrinal arguments from the standpoint of heaven, you have conceeded that there is a good reason for suffering on Earth? The problems you raise about heaven could be solved in innumerable ways without interfering with anyone's free will. I don't know with any certainty how they will be fixed, but there are limitless ways to fix them.

MadMordigan

I don't know with any certainty how they will be fixed, but there are limitless ways to fix them.

And since they aren't even explained within the bible, we just have to take your word on them? Come on man, how credulous do you think we are?

I know it makes no sense this Yugo has 400hp, and I can't explain how it works, but if you just have faith and buy it, I know you'll be satisfied...I promise!

luvluv

My bad, didn't see the fifth page:

Jack:

I believe in a God who intervenes only when absolutely necessary for His purposes. I don't believe in a God who constantly intervenes, and I don't see how that constant intervention could occur and not interfere with our free will. How could such a mechanism function naturally? The pain sensors and the fight or flight mechanism gives the animal the best chance in a fight to escape or to prevail. If this mechanism kicked in prematurely, perhaps the animal, because it is no longer feeling pain, could stop struggling and be killed when pain could have induced it to fight and survive. How would this "defence mechanism" know for certain when all was lost? And if it didn't, wouldn't it cause the animal to often die when, if it would have fought just a little longer, it could have escaped. Such a defense mechanism, overall, would be counterproductive to the animals survival. Pain does end, at death. But the pain ending before that could cause more death than necessary. In the animal kingdom, there would be an ineveitable trade off of death for a lack of pain. If what you are asking for is God's constant intervention, even if humans only saw this occuring in the animal world, they would have direct knowledge of supernatural power that would effect their free will.

Yes. I am, generally speaking, a very happy person. Not only that, I have had momments of real, genuine joy. How is that possible in a universe in which there is an omnipotent being who desires me to be unhappy?

In short, if there were an Omnipotent Sadist, things would be a lot worse than they are, wouldn't they?

I probably could not objectively convince you that God is not indifferent, my belief that God is good comes from more personal experience, but it is fairly obvious that He is not malevolent. If He was, none of us would ever have a happy momment.

Hobbs:

Well, Satan is an archangel. That's about as powerful as you can get and not be part of the Godhead. The Bible hints that he has enormous power, more than enough to destroy this planet and everyone in it were he not restrained by God's power. Just because a being of that power can rebel in God's presence, it does not follow that human beings can. Similar things can be said of ordinary angels. They are much more powerful than humans, so it would be fallacious for us to assume that we can do anything that they can do.

Further, it is pretty obvious to me why God did not create a world full of archangels with free will. It's already known that an archangel's power is so great that only God has the ability to restrain it. People who have no discipline or character with the power of archangels would destroy each other (and everything else) before they had a chance to develop any character unless they were directly restrained by God, and thus would have no (or limited) free will.

I don't like those people, either. I don't want to see anyone come to harm.

luvluv

mad:

I can't give you all the answers, but the point is, you will never have all the answers and you've never had complete knowledge about any decision that you have ever made. Did you know, for certain, that your spouse would never cheat on you before you got married? How do your children really know that you'll feed them every day? Why should they trust that?

As Wendell Berry says, we will never have complete knowledge. If complete knowledge is required before action, action becomes impossible. The question of life, given that fact, is not how can I know more but what is the best way to act with incomplete knowledge?

The answer, of course, is faith. That which you so decry in the religious realm is an element with which you cannot go a day of your life without exercising. Everytime you cross a bridge or go into a building or use an elevator you are trusting, without complete evidence, that these things will support you.

I'm not asking you to accept Christ on no evidence. Just as their is evidence that most of the people who got on elevators and bridges have been supported by them, so there is evidence that many who have placed their trust in God have been supported and rewarded for that trust. You can know that for yourself, but it will, like everything else worth having in life, require risk. And faith.

Hobbs

I think I've made it quite clear all along that I agree that there are good reasons for some suffering in this world as we happen to find it. I've also made it clear that I think this is fully understandable in terms of a godless, natural universe.

I hope I have also made it clear that from the fact that there are good reasons for some suffering we experience in this world as it is, it does not follow that there are good reasons for all suffering we experience.

You said that you "trust God enough to know that He is fair." I take that to mean that you cannot demonstrate that all suffering makes sense, but that you have faith that it does. That's where we disagree: I see suffering that does not seem to make any sense and I conclude that there is suffering that does not make any sense, whereas you see suffering that does not make any sense and you conclude that God must be able to make sense of it. Not seeing any reason to believe that there is such a god, I don't share your conclusion.

The issue at hand in this thread is how one can conclude that there is a God who is both good and powerful when there is so much seemingly unnecessary, gratuitous suffering in the world. Your answer, as far as I can tell, is that if there is such a god, then the suffering is not gratuitous and unnecessary, and that even if we don't understand how or why that is, God does, and we will too eventually. But that looks to me like you are assuming precisely what MrDarwin called into question with his initial post in order to prove what MrDarwin called into question.

MrDarwin

What you are suggesting is that, if one person exercises his free will to torture and kill another person, God considers it the lesser of two evils not to intervene (by somehow stopping the torture and murder), even though by his actions the murderer is robbing his victim of free will? That God considers the free will of the murderer to be more important than the free will of the victim?

Hobbs

The standard equivication on 'faith'. Faith as going beyond, but in the same direction as, the evidence is not the same as faith going against the evidence. I see that an elevator has repeatedly worked before, and I conclude that it is likely that it will work again. I see that there is seemingly gratuitous, pointless suffering in the world and I'm supposed to conclude that there really is a point to it?

Yes, there is plenty of evidence that Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Sunni and Shiite Muslims, Hindus, Etc, Etc, have found comfort and support in their beliefs. Given that they cannot all be right, and that at least the large majority of them must be wrong, all that leads me to conclude is that people can find comfort and support in false beliefs. It does nothing to give any evidence that any of them is true.

MrDarwin

Do you see the irony of this last sentence with respect to your other arguments about benevolence vs. suffering? You objected to my saying (in effect), "If God was benevolent, none of us would ever have an unhappy moment."

How would you know what suffering really was, if you did not have moments when you did not suffer? You believe that suffering is necessary for us to have free will, and that we could not know the meaning of "good" without also knowing suffering. But maybe it's the other way around: it's necessary for us to have free will, and it's necessary to have little flashes of good in our existence, in order for us to truly suffer whether in this life or the next.

[ August 22, 2002: Message edited by: MrDarwin ]</p>