Posted on 07/17/2009 5:37:12 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I grew up during the polio epidemics of the early fifties. I never understood why a loving God would allow so many children to have polio. I would go to Sunday School and learn “Jesus Loves Me” and “Jesus Loves the Little Children,” and on Monday I would give money to the March of Dimes. That has haunted me these many years. I still wonder what became of those unfortunate children who posed for those posters, especially those who were imprisoned in the iron lungs. Just so you all will know, I was five years old in 1952.
This all gets filed under philosophy. Philosophers strike me as people who like to talk a lot, like to string words together in a kind of magic loop designed to leave the listener with no good answer, and like to satisfy themselves that somehow they have proved or disproved some aspect of existence. Like magicians, they set up a situation in which they control the props and manipulate them to produce an expected outcome. The manager at WalMart in the example is such a prop. Words. Like a magician’s smoke, fog and mirrors.
Question for philosopher/atheist: Why do you give a rat’s ass what I do or don’t believe? Do something productive with your time.
Saving you from what?
This just in: Mohammed’s God ain’t the same one Christians and Jews worship.
It is not a good question.Children believe in Santa Claus.The question posed by the author is silly.
that we know for sure but it still doesn’t diminish the fact that Islam is a major world religion and growing ( unfortunately)
I like your reply you said somethings I wanted to say but didn’t
Yes, I believe in Christ & in Santa!!
If it appears irrational to ascribe the acquisition of the watch to Santa Claus, why is it not equally irrational to ascribe it to God? In short, what makes the Christian any more rational than Alfred (who invoked Santa as the one who gave him his watch)?
OK, I'll take the bait. It is really quite simple. In the first instance, the writer makes it very clear that the interviewer is of the understanding that the adult person who says Santa Claus gave him the watch literally believes that some guy in a red suit came down his chimney and left the watch under the tree. So, of course the interviewer thinks the guy is crazy - who wouldn't.
But within the context of modern human society, adults of normal intelligence understand that people often thank the Lord, or explain that something they achieved was a result of prayer, or inspiration from some spiritual process. If the interviewer were to actually think that the person who says his watch was a result of praying for it, or the Lord's grace, was stating that the watch literally came from the Lord -- as in it was handed to him by God or Jesus himself -- then the interviewer would be more crazy than the fellow who believes in Santa Claus.
The person who relates his possession of the watch to his spiritual activities is making a statement about himself and his beliefs in the context of well understood shared aspects and norms of our culture. That isn't irrational at all.
So the hypothetical is really about a much different question than the author purports it to be. It is just one of many attempts to use clever wording and shallow logic to attempt to avoid facing the reality and power of spirituality.
Do you have children? If so, do you interfere constantly in their lives and save them from every mishap? If you do have children, I am sure you love them, but you also know that they are their own people.
I don’t think the fact that God does not seem to constantly intervene in our world, is proof of anything one way or the other. I am sure he has his reasons for what he does.
parsy.
The short answer would be that God is a not a goody-dispenser and that you're missing the point of life.
The longer answer can be (partially) explained with Pascal's Wager.
Pascal's Wager is roughly as follows. (Forgive me for oversimplifing it)
Pascal says you should wager on the former because the upside can be very good. And if you're wrong nothing happens anyway.
Now before you think about it too hard, here is a heads up: Pascal's Wager is bogus. It is a compelling Mr.Spock-type argument to throw at an agnostic or an atheist. However if you do believe in God as he is known in the major world religions, you will be able to identify the faulty premise of the argument.
Most of the Christians can probably pick out the flaw right away. However an atheist typically can't.
Answer:
The flaw in Pascal's Wager is selfishness.
It can be summed up in Job 1:9-10. Basically Satan was claiming that Job is sucking up to God to score points, like an employee brown-nosing the boss. But God doesn't want that. He wants us to love God, not his goodies. So to show Satan his accusation is wrong God inflicts great suffering on Job to test him, and to prove to Satan that Job's love of God is independent of Job's fortune or circumstances or rewards.
Thinking of heaven as some sort of eternal playland (which is what Pascal's Wager does) is to miss the point. God wants us to love Him as much as He loves us. It's a relationship. The purpose of heaven is to get closer to God, and He to you.
So the answer is that (perhaps) God saved the woman's life, even with the broken neck, because He knew it would make her stronger spiritally and improve her relationship with Him. Or because she would witness about God's love from her bed in a stronger way than she ever thought possible and bring more people to Him. We will never know the exact reason in this lifetime. All we know is the relationship. That's the key.
12 For who knows what is good for a man in life, during the few and meaningless days he passes through like a shadow? Who can tell him what will happen under the sun after he is gone?
Death
It is amazing to think of how many millions of people throughout history have died because of their unprovable beliefs. Just so you all know, I was raised Catholic, was an altar boy who served the latin mass and can still, to this day, recite, if not spell, the sucipiot. I am now an agnostic... and a history buff...and am constantly seeking evidence so that my world view more closely resembles reality.
I am glad you agree. :O)
I do believe in God but I have no idea what God is up to. Every attempt to explain God is an insult to God. Christianity teaches that God “permits” little babies to suffer and die, because of of “original sin.” Any being who is all loving would never permit that. Just as any parent who loved his child would never stand by and let him suffer and die if he could prevent it. All explanations of God’s will and God’s nature are woefully inadequate.
Colossians 2:16-17 (New International Version)
16Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
Thank you. I seem to have hit a tipping point :{)
Do you seriously think a religious nut is capable of rational thought???I didn’t think so.
I would hope that you would know that the freedoms we have in this country and what the founders envisioned were modeled after the love our God has for us and “the freedom he gives us to choose” no matter that we will also need to ‘suffer the consequences’ of bad decisions. Please don't wish for God to be just another Hitler or Obama Rock on!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.