Originally posted by sonhouseThat is not so. People respond to childhood death by having more children. I rather suspect that it encourages population growth not the reverse. What is currently causing massive population growth is that when people are in transitions from a situation of poverty and high levels of infant death to a wealthier and healthier society, it takes a generation or two for the high birth rates to come down. Societies where having 9 children in the hope of 2 surviving to adulthood, now have 9 children with 8 surviving to adulthood.
Early death only has only one benefit, reducing population growth.
Another large cause of high population growth is simply lack of birth control methods. Many poorer people do use birth control when it is made readily available to them.
Originally posted by KellyJaySo you are saying that people need to learn the lesson the hard way? I still don't think it is a valid argument, but I do understand what you are saying.
I'm saying that why are things thought of as evil and not good?
If you have God just saying so, why would that be good enough,
but to let it all play out so judments are clear and evil is stripped of
all arguments on judgment day, that ends it forever not just for a
season where it could and would appears again, and again.
Kelly
Originally posted by sonhouseyou fail to see my point. i claim that you cannot eliminate evil without eliminating free will.
That makes absolutely no sense. If we can eliminate evil from the world, like the evil of christianity, or islam, the world would simply be a safer place to raise your kids, no zealots bombing abortion centers, burning crosses in the name of god, forced conversions, religious wars, all that real evil would be gone and we would still be going to school, runn ...[text shortened]... I think that would go a long way to eliminate evil and the world would be a lot better for it.
sure, you can reduce it through education. through maturing ourselves as a species. but if free will exists, sooner or later a person will choose what benefits him and hurts others.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI would not say learning the lesson is what is going on, but a revealing
So you are saying that people need to learn the lesson the hard way? I still don't think it is a valid argument, but I do understand what you are saying.
of truth. Evil is being revealed for what it trully is, and when all of this
plays out, there will be no question of the righteousness of the
judment against evil and those that lived their lives that way. Just as
the grace and mercy of God will also be on full display.
Kelly
Originally posted by kastLots of questions, I'll come back to this post when I have more time.
While I understand your viewpoint, zahlanzi, that it is sometimes more comforting for some to believe that the end of this life is not in fact the end of life, I have to ask - does that make god any more real?
In my opinion, the people who say that they believe in god because they don't want this to be it are CHOOSING to believe in god for their benefit but ...[text shortened]... why not just make them from the start and then see who broke them?
Kelly
Originally posted by twhiteheadi don't agree with your analysis. it was better for them on the ship. they stayed 700 years on it and they were content and comfortable. the fact they were fat and weak is irrelevant because they didn't need to be strong and fit, it was all handed to them. being fat and weak is only an issue when it stops you from achieving what you want. and all they wanted it was provided to them.
Yet if you analyze the story properly you will realize that the analogy does not in fact work. If living on the ship was really so much better, they would have stayed on it. They realized that their lives were not comfortable as they were fat, weak and lazy.
Any such argument doesn't even begin to address the child mortality issue. The argument does not ...[text shortened]... suffering does not benefit us, nor would anyone choose it gladly, not even characters in Wall-E
the really wonderful moment is when they realize they are missing out on a lot of things because they get all with no effort. so they choose to leave the comfort of their ship and slowly rebuild earth.
Regarding the last part of your argument. what life is there when nothing happens? would you characterize a convict in solitary confinement as "alive"? how about someone in a coma, a coma you know he will not wake up from? what would you accomplish in a world where everything is given to you, all you have to do is ask? i want choices. if i want to sit on the couch and watch TV i want to be able to do so because i choose to, not because it is all that i can do, all that i know. tragic thing when a child dies. weak people say it is god's fault. others say it is proof god doesn't exist, again weak. instead of realizing god might have better stuff to do than kill each person in the universe, cause all natural disasters and invent new plagues.
man is responsible for its destiny. and just because god doesn't intervene it doesn't mean he doesn't care. of course he may really be a bastard but that assumption is really counter-productive and if it is true, there is nothing we can do about it anyway.
Originally posted by ZahlanziWell if it was really 'eventually' in a fully mature race, I could live with that, compared to how things are now, where evil seems to ooze out of every pore.
you fail to see my point. i claim that you cannot eliminate evil without eliminating free will.
sure, you can reduce it through education. through maturing ourselves as a species. but if free will exists, sooner or later a person will choose what benefits him and hurts others.
wait, weak? How is it a weak argument for those that say that god loves us? It is not asking for god to intervene and give EVERYTHING to every single person. Not even to just one single person. It's asking this supposed god to allow each child to have an opportunity to make those choices you just mentioned. If the beauty of life is the ability to make choices for ourselves, then I see two problems with the idea of a loving god:
1) Call it weak...but what it really is is that god doesn't make sense as a loving god if in fact he wants us to have choices, yet denies choices to all those dying children. It's not a weak argument. It's actually pretty solid. I don't see how anyone more powerful or more intelligent that loves someone or something beneath it can idly sit by and watch his creation die without even getting a shot at life. It makes sense when we realize there is no god watching over us
2) What kind of a "choice" is it, really, if making the "wrong choice" sends us to hell or some form of eternal damnation? That's not a choice. it's a "my way or the highway" attitude. There's a difference, in case you bring it up, between this choice and say, a criminal's choice in committing some crime knowing if caught he will be punished. The difference is, the crime is usually if not always a matter of negatively affecting someone else's freedom, society's safety, or something similar. Choosing not to believe in god is not hurting anyone...so why would he send us to hell and then say "it was your choice"? The punishment doesn't fit the "crime".
It's really surprising that you would find the children dying argument weak. No offense, but isn't rather weak to assume god exists simply because we can't explain certain things at the moment? Isn't it "weak" to think that the reason someone dies in a car accident is because "it was their time to go" or that if a person tries to commit suicide but fails "god has plans for them....it wasn't their time". Again, I mean no offense, but is it not possible to see it as "weak" when a person believes in god because they simply want some form of psychological comfort against the finality of life? That to me seems much weaker of an argument FOR god than does the argument against the loving god concerning helpless children.
I do like the way you ended your post stating that god may very well be just a bastard. This, again, is where I find myself. Either god doesn't exist, or he's a heartless bastard.
Of course, there's always the possibility, just as likely as there being a god in the first place I suppose, that god was simply a child and his parents told him to leave his toys alone and go eat dinner...so he left us here to fend for ourselves.
That last bit is not a shot at god...just an example of how many ways our imagination can come up with so many excuses for why god might exist and yet let the world be as it is....all the while trying to ignore the most probable and simplest of answers - God does not exist.
Have a good day everyone!
EDIT: gosh...i always edit my crap. Anyway, zahlanzi...you mentioned "what good is it..." if we have everything from the get go. My question, if I may, is if that's the wrong way of going about things, then why did god in fact give us "everything" we needed when first creating adam and eve? Wasn't the world perfect then? Sure, he gave them a choice about the fruit tree or tree of knowledge or whatever...but wouldn't you say they had a shot at perfect living first? We, on the other hand, don't have a choice between a nice perfect garden of eden and a life of troubles. I agree completely that this world with its ups and downs is much more interesting than a world of pure bliss where we just sit around enjoying life and god....but isn't that how it started according to the bible? isn't that boring way of life the way it's supposed to be in heaven as well?
Thanks!
Originally posted by kastif god gives something to a child why not give it to a teen. then why not to a young adult. but if young adults get a freebie, why not the 30 year old who just got a promotion and a child and life just starts. why not give it to a 60 year old on the verge of discovering the cure for cancer.
wait, weak? How is it a weak argument for those that say that god loves us? It is not asking for god to intervene and give EVERYTHING to every single person. Not even to just one single person. It's asking this supposed god to allow each child to have an opportunity to make those choices you just mentioned. If the beauty of life is the ability to make choi ...[text shortened]... 's supposed to be in heaven as well?
Thanks!
same rules for everyone. you get born and you die. some live a happy and full life. some are born into abusive families. some get sick and die at very early ages. what do you want, do-overs? cheat codes to the game of life?
if god would make sure every child lives, we would have no need for pediatricians. but what if god suddenly stops caring personally for the children? what would happen to them in a world with nobody to care for them because nobody other than god ever did that.
humans will always need something. so far, throughout our history we were able to get it. there was no need for god to magically conjure the plans for an airplane or semiconductors. the recipes for antibiotics. and we learned things from our journeys. we learned Nazism is a bad idea, we learned democracy is better than tyranny and information is power whereas ignorance leads to dependency.
if god hands out freebies, god causes the humans to become parasitic. dependent on him. i find the idea of being a parasite repulsing and so would you. it is not the responsibility of god to look out after us. sure, if humans would have been incapable of caring for themselves, divine intervention would have made sense. would you say we are incapable of finding a cure for cancer? to stop children dying? to eradicate racism? to prevent future holocausts?
could God have given these things to us from the start? sure. now we would have needed other things. and this is where it becomes tricky. if at some point god decides he doesn't want to help us anymore, we would be left alone, with no lessons learned. and instead of fighting world wars with rifles and cloth airplanes, we would fight them with nukes and other yummy SF stuff.
one last thing: would you be willing to care for your child, provide for him, clothe him etc for ever? even when the "child" is 40 and could perfectly well be able to fend for himself? so why would you demand god to look after you or every child in the world where we have the responsibility of caring for ourselves.
zahlanzi:
First, I didn't ask god for anything. I'm asking that if a god existed, why not start kids off on equal footing until they can make decisions for themselves and decide whether to be "bad" or "good"?
Secondly, the creation story states that adam and eve WERE in a perfect world. They messed up...not us. So to say that god "can't" just give everyone a chance at the nice, perfect life is to say that the story of adam and eve to begin with is a complete lie....and I agree with that conclusion.
Third, it is a ridiculous argument to say that if god made sure every child lived a healthy life until they can make their own, adult decisions that pediatricians would be out of a job and so it's good for business. I work in a hospital. I would rather all people be healthy than keep my job, if that was the choice. Ask any ANY pediatrician whether they would rather be out of a career and have to choose a different specialty in medicine or if they would rather kids continue to die of diseases; I'm betting they would rather look for a different job. If they'd selfishly say that they'd rather have sick kids to keep their job, then they're not good pediatricians, are they?
Last, your comment concerning do-overs and cheat codes is another attempt to link me to wanting "freebies". I am not asking for anything for myself. I'm not asking for "do-overs" or cheat codes...I'm asking for this supposedly loving god to give everyone an equal shot from the get go...if they make bad choices later, they pay for it. Children shouldn't have to pay for it. Certainly not to keep pediatricians in business.
I respect that you're protecting your faith and trying to give explanations/answers to these questions. However, I have to say that this last post seems like grasping for straws. It seems a desperate attempt for explaining the unfairness in the world - specifically for children. Do you think Jesus would have taken this stand if he saw a sick child? "Oh, well, at least he'll make business for the local doctor."
Originally posted by kastyou did ask god for freebies. you claim that the children of the world are his job and he should be the one looking after them. until when? as a parent would you claim that it is the job of the government to look after your child? or your job?
zahlanzi:
First, I didn't ask god for anything. I'm asking that if a god existed, why not start kids off on equal footing until they can make decisions for themselves and decide whether to be "bad" or "good"?
Secondly, the creation story states that adam and eve WERE in a perfect world. They messed up...not us. So to say that god "can't" just give ever ...[text shortened]... child? "Oh, well, at least he'll make business for the local doctor."
don't you understand that any freebies given to you by god(even if the children benefit) sets a precedent? it is your job to look after the children, not god's. all do have equal footing. it is called birth. then things start to get complicated because that is what life is, complicated.
looking after the children of the world is your job. you would like no diseases for children even if you can provide that yourself with a little work. what about the child in a house that is about to be swept by a tornado? would you like god to stop that tornado too? would you like god to lift the bus that is about to hit a 9 year old into the air? would you like god to magically make all child rapers disappear?
adam and eve story is a metaphor. it has different meanings than the ones you use her. and you cannot argue that god doesn't give a perfect life, he does give it, it is called heaven. this life however is about building you up as a person, a person who overcomes obstacles.
you have misunderstood me. i complained that in a world of healthy children because of grace by god, pediatricians will no longer required. but because we depend on god, should god ever to withdraw his offer of health for kids, a lot of kids will die because we would be incapable for a while to look after them. that is what i meant, not that poor pediatricians will be out of a job, read more carefully
simply because the arguments aren't sticking doesn't mean I am not reading your posts carefully. I am reading them in their entirety. The trouble is, you are running all over the place trying to defend god's existence.
For instance, you ask that if I have a child, would I ask that the government look after that child - no I would not ask the government to do so. But even the government does in fact feel an obligation to protect the interests and health of children...through child health care programs, welfare, and other things. This is the government trying to help those children in need...god can't even do that....because he's not real.
Again, again, and again - I am NOT asking for freebies. I am an adult. I don't want anything from a mythical god, anyway. however, if god existed, the argument still stands that yes, yes, yes, he should give people equal footing at birth.
you continue to go back and forth. Your most recent post states that children are born on "equal footing" and that's it's called birth. ok, how is that equal footing when you have many disabled, many born into abusive families, and many dying before they can even open their eyes to the outside world?
It's not equal footing. Not by a long shot. I'm ok with this, because god does NOT exist. However, the reason I have continued this conversation with you is that you say he does exist contrary to the continued tragedies of life. Would I ask god to stop the tornado? YES. He COULD, couldn't he? Then why not?
Let's run with this tornado question a minute. Let's say there's a man that owns some farm land in tornado alley. He's already gotten his house torn down twice by tornadoes but he refuses to leave. Let's make him a bad man in that he refuses to leave and, thus, keeps his family in jeopardy even though he can have the same life and business a few hundred miles away in a much safer area. Sure enough, a tornado is coming - headed straight for him and his family. Now, he has a 6 month old child and for whatever reason chose NOT to make a safe area to ride the storm out. the child is now in a direct path of the tornado, purely due to his father's stubbornness. Should god save the child? YES.
You keep asking "until what age?" I guess you think I'm asking him to take care of us until 18, at which point you might ask "why not 19" and so on and so forth. Let's say this, god should protect children from harm until they have reached a level of intellectual maturity where they are able to discern between good and bad decisions and choose for themselves. This could be 6 yrs. old or 18 yrs old or 25. God would know, wouldn't he? But that's not the case. Not even 1 day old babies are spared misery. Why?
1) god does not exist - this is just life - it's not fair but it's reality
2) god is a ****
I can see from your posts that I am not getting anywhere with you concerning the child argument. I'll just end it, then, by stating that life is NOT fair. Not even at birth do we have equal footing. A fair, loving, or just god would make it so that things are fair at least until a certain point of cognition.
I hope we get to talk about other reasons why god either doesn't exist or at least does not have to exist to explain some other topic. This one is getting a little dry (at least where we've taken the thread to) as it seems neither of us is necessarily agreeing any more with the other in this instance (let's call it the "child fairness dilemma"😉. Whatever the case, thanks for the discussion.
As for the bible - I am the first to agree that it's not at all factual. I don't believe the adam and eve story, the flood story, the whale jonah story, or any of the miracles that Jesus performed. So yeah, if we take it to be simply a text that is old, many times outdated, and only partially useful as a guide to living life in a fruitful manner, then I agree. I say partially because a lot of the bible (especially old testament - mostly old testament) is full of stuff that would catch most devout christians off guard for its ugliness, gruesomeness, and outright outrageousness....all nesses, haha. Interesting read, for sure...
-kast
Originally posted by sonhouseI'm a theist and I'm not functionally insane! My invisible pet giraffe told me I wasn't.
Just think of it, their god makes a whole universe, puts in billions of years or is it 8,000, this omnicient god who knows all about every quark in every atom of every cell in every life form in the universe, chooses to spend its time directing the very rocks to grow, the very air to come into being, the very oceans to come forth, the sun to light up the ea ...[text shortened]... ping this god will set things straight in the 'afterlife' a nice oxymoron if ever I heard one.
Originally posted by kast"Too many questions, I'm sorry...but one more. Why did god make the ten commandments AFTER people had already lived and died? why not just make them from the start and then see who broke them?"
While I understand your viewpoint, zahlanzi, that it is sometimes more comforting for some to believe that the end of this life is not in fact the end of life, I have to ask - does that make god any more real?
In my opinion, the people who say that they believe in god because they don't want this to be it are CHOOSING to believe in god for their benefit but ...[text shortened]... why not just make them from the start and then see who broke them?
I answered your other questions I believe but did so talking to some
of the other posters here after your post. Your 10 Commandment
question I’d say because at the beginning we didn’t need those
commandments we only required the one rule to avoid evil. Later after
evil was introduced into the human experience other safeguards were
required.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJaySo your story is god made all of us, but evil was introduced, unbeknown to god? Your god is not so infallible then I would think.
"Too many questions, I'm sorry...but one more. Why did god make the ten commandments AFTER people had already lived and died? why not just make them from the start and then see who broke them?"
I answered your other questions I believe but did so talking to some
of the other posters here after your post. Your 10 Commandment
question I’d say because at ...[text shortened]... after
evil was introduced into the human experience other safeguards were
required.
Kelly