by cofty 2596 Replies latest jw experiences
I'd say if the all-important "Universal Sovereignty" (US) issue outweighs God's questionable decision to sit on His Divine Hands while 250k die, then the issue is settled.... God doesn't deserve to rule. ~~adamah
"Seek you the LORD while he may be found, call you upon him while he is near:"( This is the Bibles pleading but not an issued command )
I beleive this is what free will is all about however ... it is your right to chose................go with it... your search for God may well be over
Caliber - Its as if you have not read a single word of the 42 pages of the thread.
Are we saying that the calamities should be selective in their working, searching out only those who deserve to suffer'? If God did always intervene in human affairs and earth events would he need to do this .....yearly, daily or hourly ? Man lives in an universe of cause and effect and must accept its consequences
These points have been thoroughly dealt with numerous times already.
I am not suggesting that god should intervene to prevent all human suffering. I am not asking why he does not curb human free will in order to reduce suffering.
You know this already, you are deliberately obfuscating.
I am asking why god would not stop a tsunami. Doing so would not effect free will in any way. I have stressed this for 42 pages. I can't count how often I have made it clear I am only asking about "natural evil" - bad stuff that has nothing to do with human actions.
You have just said that - it is right, loving and ethical to passively observe the death of a quarter of a million innocent people, even if it is within your power to prevent it.
You have still offered no explanation as to why it is right, loving and ethical. You seem to be suggesting that drowning a quarter of a million people is of no consequence because this life doesn't really matter.
Even if it was true that there is an afterlife that doesn't begin to answer the question. The suffering of those who drwoned, those who were injured and the bereaved was real suffering in this life. Suffering that it would have been trivially easy for god to prevent.
You paint a picture of a god that is strictly "hands off". This is not the god of Jesus or of the New Testament. He is a god who is initimately involved in the affairs of the world.
I hope you are never hypocritical enough to ask god for anything or give him thanks for anything you perceive to be a blessing. If you do, your entire argument fails.
Caliber said- "Seek you the LORD while he may be found, call you upon him while he is near:"( This is the Bibles pleading but not a issued command)
And what the Hades does that random scripture have to do with the price of tea in China? What a non-sequitur, a meaningless platitude...
Caliber said- I beleive this is what free will is all about however ... it is your right to chose................go with it... your search for God may well be over
Holy Hades, Caliber: what a surprise!
Just like the dumb-cluck JW who waves their idiot-flags proudly whenever they repeat mindless crapola like, "God didn't want to create men as robots, who HAD to love and obey him, so God gave Adam the gift of free will", you clearly don't understand the basic terms used in Xian theology, such as 'free will' (vs 'freedom of choice'), since you use them as if they're synonyms when they're NOT.
You really need to learn the schtick you claim to believe in, noting the difference between 'free will' and 'freedom of choice'; it comes up in this article:
(BTW, the WTBTS cannot be blamed for not understanding the difference: they've been pretty consistent in acknowledging the difference, and using the terms properly, so the failure to understand the difference squarely falls on those believers who repeat the prevalent "robot" meme.)
Then, come on back here and explain how those 250k dead HAD either 'free will' or 'freedom of choice' in the tsunami (hint: they didn't, since it was NOT a situation which required obedience to some command given by God; it was an example of 'natural evil').
OR, if you're referring to my 'free-will' choice NOT to worship God, here's a hint: per the Bible and Xian theology, it's not my 'free will' choice not to worship God.
TEC said- So in other words the answer to the question that Caliber asked Cofty is NO:
IS it honest or in the spirit of fair play ,to ask a question so loaded with adjectives and adverbs that are so bias to yes or no,(if not actually untrue or matter of opinion )
that to answer any other way without explaination would make you look totally unreasonable ? (one word answer yes or no)( you cannot qualify your answer in any way )
That's a silly strawman argument, since Cofty said to answer with a one-word answer, and THEN Caliber can qualify the answer ALL HE WANTS by engaging in repeating the same-ol' hollow vapid excusiology that's already been said, as if he's a parrot.
Your protests are silly, and simply trying to delay giving an ugly answer, since it's too embarrassing to actually type out the answer that is self-evident to anyone with an ounce of morality (and Caliber and TEC are too afraid to publicly admit it, since it would mean 'throwing their God under the bus').
Adam
You have just said that - it is right, loving and ethical to passively observe the death of a quarter of a million innocent people, even if it is within your power to prevent it.
I don't think anyone has said that Cofty.
I think that is your loaded statement... same as your loaded question. I objected from the start to your addition of the word 'passive'... and now also the word 'innocent'... (has nothing to do with innocence or guilt).
I'm not going through it again just to go around in circles with you. You will not accept any answer other than the one you have concluded, and you will not even consider that there are things you do not know. Even when you have to admit that there is so much that you do not know... so much that you are not even willing to consider or receive? Because anything to do with the spirit is nonsense to you. Even though God is spirit. If you limit what you are willing to recieve... and the truth lies outside what you are willing to receive... how will you ever know the truth?
Cofty, you don't even know the physical consequences to the action you seem to think should have been done.
I asked at the beginning and I did not get an answer:
Why would God not just put an end to death altogether?
Then all of the causes of this physical and temporary death become... moot.
And why should He be more concerned about the temporary death (of the flesh only; death that His Son can resurrect people from) - than about eternal death of His children?
How could a passive and unloving God have sent His Son to give LIFE... if that God did not love and did not act?
This is not the god of Jesus or of the New Testament. He is a god who is initimately involved in the affairs of the world. the lives of His children.
Exactly.
Not that they would not die or suffer. Christ said that disasters would happen. He said that they would have suffering.
Intimately involved - as in speaking, guiding, teaching, promising and giving eternal life, giving fruits of the spirit, giving the right to become children of God, giving strength and comfort and love and life.
He never promised to end natural events. He did promise to defeat death... and to give Life and a Kingdom to those who are in His Son, as well as to the sheep (from the sheep and goats parable).
Not enough for you?
Peace,
tammy
THE WATCHTOWER JANUARY 2014 Why Does God Allow Suffering? Read all about it at JW.org
By his words, Satan implied that Eve—and by extension, all humans—would be better off without God’s rulership. In this case too, Jehovah knew that the best way to address the challenge would be to let Satan try to prove his point. So God has allowed Satan to rule this world for a time. That explains why we see so much suffering around us—it’s because Satan, not God, is the real ruler of the world. But there is good news…
The Bible teaches these two beautiful truths about God. First, Jehovah is there for us when we suffer…So even though David experienced suffering, he found comfort in knowing that Jehovah saw everything he went through. Do you find that comforting—the thought that Jehovah is aware of everything, even our painful emotions that other humans may not fully understand?...
The second beautiful truth is that God will not allow our suffering to go on indefinitely. The Bible teaches that he will soon bring an end to Satan’s wicked rulership. And he will completely undo all the bad things that have happened, including the things that you and your mother have suffered. May I come back next week and show you why we can be sure that God will soon end all suffering?
Simplify your life with the Watchtower.
I don't think anyone has said that Cofty. - Tammy
Is it right or loving or ethical to passively observe the death of a quarter of a million innocent people, if is within your power to prevent it? - Cofty
Yes - Caliber.
If you read Caliber's response afterward, I think you will see how he does not actually agree with that entire sentiment as stated. (unless i misunderstood him... I also for some reason thought Caliber answered no to that question. My apologies.)
Peace,
tammy
Cofty, you don't even know the physical consequences to the action you seem to think should have been done. - Tammy
A god who cannot calm a wave before it even reaches the surface without negative consequences is a pathetic deity.
My question remains. I hae considered and refuted more than 20 answers and given well thought-out rational reasons for rejecting them.
I am hoping somebody will be along with a better idea that doesn't involve a cowardly retreat to inscrutibility.
I also for some reason thought Caliber answered no to that question. My apologies - Tammy
Like I said, try reading before you wave your pom-poms.
