Author Topic: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?  (Read 1315 times)

SevenPatch and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1783
  • Darwins +13/-229
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?
« Reply #116 on: August 18, 2014, 04:28:36 PM »
For those who wonder why I created this thread here it's mainly because many atheists where blaming God even if they did not believe in him.
They were using this blame as an argument.
So I thought, let's see what they really think about God and evil. Asking it in a theist forum I would get the answer "exactly as he is doing it right now!"
You're worth more than my time

Offline dloubet

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1312
  • Darwins +57/-1
  • Gender: Male
    • Denisloubet.com
Re: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?
« Reply #117 on: August 18, 2014, 08:31:59 PM »
Thank you for your answers. I like dloubet's solution.
So let's say we mock someone (the N word example is a good one) we would feel the pain the black man felt. Would it be systematic?
In the example of the involuntary fire in the wood that burn 2 people. The culprit wouldn't feel the pain of the burnt because it wasn't their intention.
What if they voluntary burned the forest (they have pyromania) but didn't know there were people in it?
What if they initially wanted voluntary to burn only one tree and didn't know that it would pick up?
What about the case where you find your wife with another man? Or worse, the case were you find a pedophile with your kid. Would you feel the pain voluntary inflicted by you baseball bat hitting his face?
These would all be solved by a perfect judgement from the god. As I said, this would be arranged to not allow masochists to manipulate the system, or similar exploits.
An argument could be made that applying this system to people accidentally causing suffering would result in people thinking more carefully about the actions they're planning to take. Maybe apply half the suffering, in that case.
Denis Loubet

Online Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1783
  • Darwins +13/-229
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?
« Reply #118 on: Yesterday at 04:22:16 PM »
My question then is the following. Is the person who hurts someone 100% responsible?
Let's say a army guy who shoot to kill someone because he was ordered too.
Does he and his commandant die too?
I take the example of protestants in the street. They protest, this protest do not allow you to go to work. You need to go to work to feed your family today. Do the protesters suffer?
They are asked to move by the police but chose to stay nevertheless. Do the police suffer when they hit them with bats? Or gas them?
Finally is the perfect judgement from God is perfect according to you? or according to him? or according to someone else? the majority of people? Who?
You're worth more than my time

Offline shnozzola

Re: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?
« Reply #119 on: Yesterday at 04:27:10 PM »
No. I believe that only humans can create evil.

Luk,
           What do you suppose causes this evil?  Where does it come from?  If you are saying somehow the human psyche, the human experience creates it?
Do you think there is a satan, that manipulates people?  I suppose you realize that not believing in evil goes hand in hand with not believing in ****.

edit - weird, why would the nanny simple machines not like the use of g-o-(o)-d?


« Last Edit: Yesterday at 04:29:30 PM by shnozzola »
“I wanna go ice fishing on Europa, and see if something swims up to the camera lens and licks it.”- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Online SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
  • Darwins +105/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?
« Reply #120 on: Yesterday at 04:34:06 PM »
For those who wonder why I created this thread here it's mainly because many atheists where blaming God even if they did not believe in him.
They were using this blame as an argument.
So I thought, let's see what they really think about God and evil. Asking it in a theist forum I would get the answer "exactly as he is doing it right now!"

Unfortunately for your god, “exactly as he is doing it right now” is exactly what we would expect if there is no god or gods.

Even worse is that in order for people to hold onto their religion they have to rationalize that “what we would expect if there is no god or gods” is exactly how their god is expected to behave.  This is what religion is, it makes excuses for a god and if that doesn’t work it convinces you that everything is all part of this god’s plan and everything is exactly as it should be.  This is a systematic self-reinforcing delusion to hold onto the flock as no one can question this god’s plan, we are insignificant lowly mortals who can’t possibly comprehend the plan of a god.  Very convenient. 

So, I’m curious, why would believing in this god’s plan make someone right, but not believing in this god’s plan make that same person wrong?  Could it be that this is one of the primary rules designed by religion to keep people believing?  Those who disobey your god and the plan are “evil”!  They will burn in hell with Satan because Satan also had the audacity to question god’s plan!  Very convenient.

Innocent children dying of curable and treatable diseases has to be rationalized away as a necessity for god’s plan to achieve a greater good.  Why is it wrong to ask, “why wouldn’t this god make a plan to avoid those children having to die miserably at a young age and unable to enjoy life and still achieve the same greater good?”  Can’t your god do that?  Won’t your god do that?  Apparently your god can’t or won’t.  Take your pick, because that is what you call a god.  A god which behaves as if it doesn’t exist.

Sidestepping the Problem of Evil won’t make it go away, sidestepping will just keep you believing a fantasy represents reality.
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Online Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1783
  • Darwins +13/-229
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?
« Reply #121 on: Yesterday at 05:49:00 PM »
          What do you suppose causes this evil? Where does it come from?  If you are saying somehow the human psyche, the human experience creates it?
Do you think there is a satan, that manipulates people?  I suppose you realize that not believing in evil goes hand in hand with not believing in ****.
Evil is a consequence of a choice. The choice of saying "no" to God.
It comes from our ability to say "no". Our freedom.
Evil is not created. It's like the famous quotes about Einstein and the dark vs the light. Dark is not created, its just the absence of light.
I think that Satan can manipulate people. He can convince them that saying no to God is the best way to go. (like he did with Eve)
We have this idea of a little angel and a little demon talking to us when it comes the time to make a choice. I believe in that kind of view. On one side there is Satan and on the other side there is your consciousness. You use you free will to make a choice. This choice can be for Good or for Evil.

weird, why would the nanny simple machines not like the use of g-o-(o)-d?
I don't understand this question. Sorry.
You're worth more than my time

Online Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1783
  • Darwins +13/-229
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?
« Reply #122 on: Yesterday at 05:54:03 PM »
So, I’m curious, why would believing in this god’s plan make someone right, but not believing in this god’s plan make that same person wrong?  Could it be that this is one of the primary rules designed by religion to keep people believing?  Those who disobey your god and the plan are “evil”!  They will burn in hell with Satan because Satan also had the audacity to question god’s plan!  Very convenient.
You know that this is not what the Catholic Church teaches, right?

Why is it wrong to ask, “why wouldn’t this god make a plan to avoid those children having to die miserably at a young age and unable to enjoy life and still achieve the same greater good?”
That's more or less the question I asked you in this thread. 
Can’t your god do that?  Won’t your god do that?  Apparently your god can’t or won’t.  Take your pick, because that is what you call a god.  A god which behaves as if it doesn't exist.
God can and won't. If he would heal amputees for example, it would create a chain reaction that would destroy our universe. For a greater good he doesn't heal the amputees :)
You're worth more than my time

Offline eh!

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1222
  • Darwins +40/-30
  • Gender: Male
  • jimmy hendrix is jesus
Re: How should God intervene against evil? Should it be systematic?
« Reply #123 on: Yesterday at 10:11:52 PM »

If he would heal amputees for example, it would create a chain reaction that would destroy our universe. For a greater good he doesn't heal the amputees :)

classic, how would this occur precisely, the extra limb appearing from nowhere would cause extra mass which would perturb the gravitational field causing a wobble in the earth's orbit in a positive feedback loop causing the earth to spiral into the sun causing a perturbation in the sun's gravitational field causing the sun to in turn collide with all the planets in our solar system causing our solar system to eat all the systems in our galaxy causing our galaxy to eat other galaxies, super-clusters....until the universe ate itself all due to an arm appearing on an amputee via god???

good thing he only cures cancer and stuff - smart god always got our backs.

proof he is all knowing, Omni-benevolent and all loving....
Signature goes here...

Offline Jag

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1689
  • Darwins +179/-7
  • Gender: Female
  • Official WWGHA Harpy, Ex-rosary squad
^^^Settle down eh!, you don't want to get on this god fellow's bad side. Considering how many animals have the ability to regrow lost limbs, it's a miracle that the universe hasn't yet been destroyed by all the "chain reactions" sparked by THAT.

Based on all the successes, I have to assume that transplants are not a problem because there's no creation of new mass, only using the mass that already exists in the donor's body. I do wonder why transplants don't piss this god character off though - I can't figure out why he doesn't smite surgeons attempting to circumvent death caused by organ failure right on the spot. He could get the intended victim and the entire medical staff that's trying to override his will in one swoop in the OR.

"His ways" sure are mysterious... &)
 
My tolerance for BS is limited, and I use up most of it IRL.

Online G-Roll

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
  • Darwins +40/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
If god did heal amputees it would cause a chain reaction that would eventually destroy the world as we know it. Thousands of people would swat a fly with their new arm all at the same time. All that force would cause tsunamis, hurricanes, and blizzards. Similar to the butterfly effect but not as cool. So I will call it the moth effect.     
In all seriousness (and related to the OP) I saw a post somewhere from J Dawg earlier about how we all blame humans for the wrongs of the world when and if we have the resources to fix a problem. Yet god with all his infinite power gets a pass on the negatives and everything positive he is the main cause of.
I think god should intervene against evil (if he actually existed). Isn't that the point?  Is the book not full of your god participating in this world? So why stop now?

Online lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Darwins +48/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
God could use the materials that make up the nipples on male mammals and use them for lost limbs, but He's too fuckin' stupid.
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Online SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
  • Darwins +105/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
You know that this is not what the Catholic Church teaches, right?

Hmm, really?  I didn’t realize the Catholic Church stopped teaching people to follow their god and what god commands.  You know, stuff like not choosing to follow “God” will result in evil.

Kind of like what you said 5 minutes earlier:

Evil is a consequence of a choice. The choice of saying "no" to God.

Wow, you are so fake.

Why is it wrong to ask, “why wouldn’t this god make a plan to avoid those children having to die miserably at a young age and unable to enjoy life and still achieve the same greater good?”
That's more or less the question I asked you in this thread.

Hint:  The answer is because there is no god or gods to be able to prevent children having to die miserably at a young age while still achieving greater good.

Can’t your god do that?  Won’t your god do that?  Apparently your god can’t or won’t.  Take your pick, because that is what you call a god.  A god which behaves as if it doesn't exist.
God can and won't. If he would heal amputees for example, it would create a chain reaction that would destroy our universe. For a greater good he doesn't heal the amputees :)

BUT DOC!  I’m BACK  …. I’m back FROM the FUTURE!

Lukvance,  you just contradicted yourself again, that is twice in a matter of 5 minutes. 

First you say “God can and won’t” but then you say “it would create a chain reaction that would destroy our universe” SO if healing amputees would destroy the universe then obviously your god can not heal amputees without destroying the universe.  You’ve just made it so your god can’t while claiming that he won’t.  That’s right, you’ve just described an incompetent god who doesn’t give a shit.  That sounds about par for the course for the Catholic god, or any god for that matter.
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Online Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1783
  • Darwins +13/-229
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
So, I’m curious, why would believing in this god’s plan make someone right, but not believing in this god’s plan make that same person wrong?  Could it be that this is one of the primary rules designed by religion to keep people believing?  Those who disobey your god and the plan are “evil”!  They will burn in hell with Satan because Satan also had the audacity to question god’s plan!  Very convenient.
You know that this is not what the Catholic Church teaches, right?
Hmm, really?  I didn’t realize the Catholic Church stopped teaching people to follow their god and what god commands.  You know, stuff like not choosing to follow “God” will result in evil.
Jesus/God left us only 2 commandments. Neither of them was "believe in me or go to hell". Both of them said "you shall love". I put back your original quote because I felt that the reply you gave me was not on the same subject/related to the question I asked.

First you say “God can and won’t” but then you say “it would create a chain reaction that would destroy our universe” SO if healing amputees would destroy the universe then obviously your god can not heal amputees without destroying the universe.  You’ve just made it so your god can’t while claiming that he won’t.  That’s right, you’ve just described an incompetent god who doesn’t give a shit.  That sounds about par for the course for the Catholic god, or any god for that matter.
Have you hear of the omnipotence paradox? : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox
Come back to me afterwards about contradicting myself when it comes to omnipotence.
You're worth more than my time