|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Why did God create the universe, and us?
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
quetzalcoatl: So how do you understand Auschwitz in the light of a loving God?
I find myself rather drawn to Moltmann's take on this: He is there in Auschwitz, suffering.
I used to be. Then I thought "big deal. Do something useful about it."
Sorry. I don't think I can do this any more. Cognitive dissonance hurts.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
quetzalcoatl: So how do you understand Auschwitz in the light of a loving God?
I find myself rather drawn to Moltmann's take on this: He is there in Auschwitz, suffering.
It's an attractive idea, but also, I get the thought, so what?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
In creation, there is going to be suffering. There is no way to avoid it. Even if there were peace on earth and hunger were eradicated, we will still get old and die; even if that death were peaceful and painless there would be the pain of loss and bereavement. And even if you decree that we all live forever -- there is undeniable pain for some of us, when the beloved dog or cat dies. We are asking for what is clearly not going to happen.
It is obvious from Jesus's own life, that the avoidance of pain and suffering is not high on His agenda. There is something else that God is trying to accomplish, but keeping us from pain and suffering is not it.
Well, OK, gementes et flentes in hac lacrimarum valle, there is mourning and weeping in this vale of tears. But hang on, there's another bit, isn't there, he will wipe every tear from their eye; there will be no more death or crying or mourning or pain.
I suppose you get to that after you've suffered enough.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
It is obvious from Jesus's own life, that the avoidance of pain and suffering is not high on His agenda. There is something else that God is trying to accomplish, but keeping us from pain and suffering is not it.
As I understand it, the reason Jesus didn't avoid pain and suffering was precisely to keep us from it. Avoiding pain and suffering was high enough upon Jesus's agenda that he spent half a night asking God to take it away from him.
If love doesn't mean wanting your loved ones to avoid pain and suffering it doesn't mean much. Now, it's true that the primary point of love isn't avoiding pain and suffering. Love is the primary Christian ethical principle because you can love someone who is perfectly happy as well as if they're suffering (unlike pity or compassion).
I don't think any answers to why there's evil are satisfactory. Ultimately evil is evil because there's no point to it. We don't have explanations. What we have is hope for the time when God will wipe every tear from our eyes. (And then faith and hope will pass away, and what will abide is love.)
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Well, OK, we don't have explanations about evil, but this is going on under the title, 'why did God create the universe?'
So I guess you get to say that we don't know why God created a universe full of arbitrariness and suffering, but on the other hand, he is omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, and his ways are not our ways, and this is the best of all possible worlds.
Hmm, there's something fishy about this.
[ 20. April 2016, 15:40: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
What sense does suffering make, if you accept the premise of a loving God? Place yourself in the middle of Auschwitz, and explain the sense of it.
I have heard from people who were at Auschwitz, and from people who have suffered terribly in other ways. My understanding is that they are not the ones who struggle with the concept of a loving God.
Your understanding is incorrect. There was a direct correlation between the Holocaust and Israel becoming one of the countries with the highest percentage of non believers.
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Your understanding is incorrect. There was a direct correlation between the Holocaust and Israel becoming one of the countries with the highest percentage of non believers.
That certainly makes sense.
I have never read anything that made that assertion before. It would be interesting to google it and see if there are articles or data suggesting a link between the terrible suffering of the holocaust and the percentage of non believers in Israel.
Is it even true that Israel is one of the countries with the highest percentage of non believers?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, OK, we don't have explanations about evil, but this is going on under the title, 'why did God create the universe?'
So I guess you get to say that we don't know why God created a universe full of arbitrariness and suffering, but on the other hand, he is omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, and his ways are not our ways, and this is the best of all possible worlds.
Hmm, there's something fishy about this.
The really fishy bit is that God had to create the universe this way, and suffering and pain and death are inevitable, and it couldn't be any other way, but it will be one day, even though it can't be.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, OK, we don't have explanations about evil, but this is going on under the title, 'why did God create the universe?'
So I guess you get to say that we don't know why God created a universe full of arbitrariness and suffering, but on the other hand, he is omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, and his ways are not our ways, and this is the best of all possible worlds.
Hmm, there's something fishy about this.
There is nothing fishy about it.
To me the easiest way to explain it is to try to come up with a system that would theoretically be better.
Let's see, here goes:
What I would do is make a system where no pain or suffering was possible. No hunger. No tears. There are people, and all of the people are loving and kind. Nature exists, but there is nothing harmful in nature. Even accidents do not happen. Food is plentiful. Everyone can do what they want, but they innately want to do nothing but good and useful things. They are incapable of doing anything except what their Creator wants them to do. They are happy.
OK. I guess that is the perfect system. ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
The really fishy bit is that God had to create the universe this way, and suffering and pain and death are inevitable, and it couldn't be any other way, but it will be one day, even though it can't be.
It's not that it can't be. It can only be with our free cooperation.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, OK, we don't have explanations about evil, but this is going on under the title, 'why did God create the universe?'
So I guess you get to say that we don't know why God created a universe full of arbitrariness and suffering, but on the other hand, he is omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, and his ways are not our ways, and this is the best of all possible worlds.
Hmm, there's something fishy about this.
There is nothing fishy about it.
To me the easiest way to explain it is to try to come up with a system that would theoretically be better.
Let's see, here goes:
What I would do is make a system where no pain or suffering was possible. No hunger. No tears. There are people, and all of the people are loving and kind. Nature exists, but there is nothing harmful in nature. Even accidents do not happen. Food is plentiful. Everyone can do what they want, but they innately want to do nothing but good and useful things. They are incapable of doing anything except what their Creator wants them to do. They are happy.
OK. I guess that is the perfect system.
I thought the perfect system is where all tears are wiped from our eyes, and there is no more mourning or death or pain?
Yet, it seems that a God who is omnipotent and omnibenevolent has produced this present system, which is full of arbitrariness and suffering.
So, how does this hang together?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
quote:
What I would do is make a system where no pain or suffering was possible. No hunger. No tears. There are people, and all of the people are loving and kind. Nature exists, but there is nothing harmful in nature. Even accidents do not happen. Food is plentiful. Everyone can do what they want, but they innately want to do nothing but good and useful things. They are incapable of doing anything except what their Creator wants them to do. They are happy.
OK. I guess that is the perfect system. [/QB]
My eyes glaze over. It is not worth the energy, to create a boring creation. I repeat: stuff has to happen.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
quote:
What I would do is make a system where no pain or suffering was possible. No hunger. No tears. There are people, and all of the people are loving and kind. Nature exists, but there is nothing harmful in nature. Even accidents do not happen. Food is plentiful. Everyone can do what they want, but they innately want to do nothing but good and useful things. They are incapable of doing anything except what their Creator wants them to do. They are happy.
OK. I guess that is the perfect system.
My eyes glaze over. It is not worth the energy, to create a boring creation. I repeat: stuff has to happen. [/QB]
Yeah, but it has to be the best stuff, doesn't it? I mean, God is omnibenevolent, isn't he, so he wants the best for us. He's omnipotent, so he can provide the best.
But the best is yet to come, not just yet? Is that it? That sounds like my second wife.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Maybe He created it to see how many pages can be produced from a one line opener.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Except of course that Christian tradition hangs this promise of a new creation with no suffering or death in front of us. So it is possible. Or this promise is - erm - misunderstood?
Or death and suffering are tied to the "principalities and powers" (Eph. 6) that must be defeated before the complete fulfillment of the Kingdom. "The last enemy to be destroyed is death." (1Cor. 15:26)
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Except of course that Christian tradition hangs this promise of a new creation with no suffering or death in front of us. So it is possible. Or this promise is - erm - misunderstood?
Or death and suffering are tied to the "principalities and powers" (Eph. 6) that must be defeated before the complete fulfillment of the Kingdom. "The last enemy to be destroyed is death." (1Cor. 15:26)
Well, that's a brilliant twist of the knife, or pen, or whatever.
This stuff would be the best, but the moths have go to it, so it has to be fumigated, when it will be restored to its full glory.
Gordon Bennett, how do you guys keep all these sub-clauses in your heads? God must use a spread-sheet. Time for a drink.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Except of course that Christian tradition hangs this promise of a new creation with no suffering or death in front of us. So it is possible. Or this promise is - erm - misunderstood?
Or death and suffering are tied to the "principalities and powers" (Eph. 6) that must be defeated before the complete fulfillment of the Kingdom. "The last enemy to be destroyed is death." (1Cor. 15:26)
Well, that's a brilliant twist of the knife, or pen, or whatever.
This stuff would be the best, but the moths have go to it, so it has to be fumigated, when it will be restored to its full glory.
Does that not fit with our experience of the world? It does mine. Read my tag line.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It just sounds to me like going 'from the solution to the plight'. I mean, that since there is only one Redeemer, the forces against him have to be painted black.
"Paul violently extinguished every other light in the world, so that Jesus might then shine it alone," (Paul Wernle).
I think this is a brilliant tour de force, however somewhat melodramatic, or even hysterical.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
God wants the best for us. But the best for us might not be the most comfortable, or pleasant, or even what we want at all.
If your definition of 'best' is that beach with the cold rum punch, it is possible that your concept is not only small, it's boring. I think it's Lewis who says that not only is Heaven better than we imagine, it is better than we can imagine. His analogy is to childhood. When you were four, your idea of the very best in life -- pizza, let us say -- was quite different from the concept you may have in your thirties. Your vision in adulthood might well include pizza. But it will encompass much more.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
God wants the best for us. But the best for us might not be the most comfortable, or pleasant, or even what we want at all.
If your definition of 'best' is that beach with the cold rum punch, it is possible that your concept is not only small, it's boring. I think it's Lewis who says that not only is Heaven better than we imagine, it is better than we can imagine. His analogy is to childhood. When you were four, your idea of the very best in life -- pizza, let us say -- was quite different from the concept you may have in your thirties. Your vision in adulthood might well include pizza. But it will encompass much more.
Including Auschwitz, brain cancer in children, and earthquakes? Oh no, they come from the powers and principalities!
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
God wants the best for us. But the best for us might not be the most comfortable, or pleasant, or even what we want at all.
If your definition of 'best' is that beach with the cold rum punch, it is possible that your concept is not only small, it's boring. I think it's Lewis who says that not only is Heaven better than we imagine, it is better than we can imagine. His analogy is to childhood. When you were four, your idea of the very best in life -- pizza, let us say -- was quite different from the concept you may have in your thirties. Your vision in adulthood might well include pizza. But it will encompass much more.
This sounds like an evil God, not one who wants what is best for us. What kind of a monster would give a child motor-neurone disease or bone cancer? What lessons would a baby learn from from living in constant pain? This is an unspeakable suggestion, that such a monster was in any sense 'loving'.
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, OK, we don't have explanations about evil, but this is going on under the title, 'why did God create the universe?'
So I guess you get to say that we don't know why God created a universe full of arbitrariness and suffering, but on the other hand, he is omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, and his ways are not our ways, and this is the best of all possible worlds.
I think there's a difference between asking why did God create the universe (as opposed to not creating the universe) and asking why God created the universe in this particular way (as opposed to in some other way).
I'd also distinguish between a strong problem of evil and a weak problem of evil. The strong problem of evil would be, given the choice between bringing into being the universe as it is or not bringing any universe into being, how could a good God bring it into being? The weak problem of evil would be why didn't God bring into being a universe with less evil in it than this one?
I've had two children so for all practical purposes I've committed myself to the bring it into being side of the strong problem.
Christianity has historically not gone in for the best of all possible worlds explanation. That's Leibniz. Christianity believes creation is fallen and needs to be redeemed.
Psychological health seems to require a general underlying assumption that the universe doesn't have too much arbitrary suffering in it, an attitude that fundamentally things are alright. Since the empirical facts are at best equivocal in their support for that, we can either accept that human existence is absurd, or else that in some way not available to direct empirical observation the universe is indeed fundamentally alright. The claim that God exists is I think one name for the belief that the universe is in some non-empirical way such that psychological health is justified.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, OK, we don't have explanations about evil, but this is going on under the title, 'why did God create the universe?'
So I guess you get to say that we don't know why God created a universe full of arbitrariness and suffering, but on the other hand, he is omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, and his ways are not our ways, and this is the best of all possible worlds.
I think there's a difference between asking why did God create the universe (as opposed to not creating the universe) and asking why God created the universe in this particular way (as opposed to in some other way).
I'd also distinguish between a strong problem of evil and a weak problem of evil. The strong problem of evil would be, given the choice between bringing into being the universe as it is or not bringing any universe into being, how could a good God bring it into being? The weak problem of evil would be why didn't God bring into being a universe with less evil in it than this one?
I've had two children so for all practical purposes I've committed myself to the bring it into being side of the strong problem.
Christianity has historically not gone in for the best of all possible worlds explanation.
Which is to its credit, because it's clearly quite easy to imagine better universes. And, fundamentally, Christianity promises there will be one. Which it couldn't, if this was the best it could be.
quote:
That's Leibniz. Christianity believes creation is fallen and needs to be redeemed.
And Dr Pangloss of course. The problem I think we have now with this explanation is "when"? Apart from not having us in it, this universe was pretty much how it is now before we even went into the trees in the first place, never mind came down from them, with disease, death and, presuming that non-human animals can nevertheless be self-aware, suffering. This is why I don't entirely agree with people saying that modern science isn't a problem for Christianity. It is. It may not be insurmountable, but it presents very great difficulties for the "created perfect then we buggered it up" narrative.
quote:
Psychological health seems to require a general underlying assumption that the universe doesn't have too much arbitrary suffering in it, an attitude that fundamentally things are alright. Since the empirical facts are at best equivocal in their support for that, we can either accept that human existence is absurd, or else that in some way not available to direct empirical observation the universe is indeed fundamentally alright. The claim that God exists is I think one name for the belief that the universe is in some non-empirical way such that psychological health is justified.
This is I think very true. Unfortunately it does play straight into the idea of religion as wish-fulfillment.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, OK, we don't have explanations about evil, but this is going on under the title, 'why did God create the universe?'
So I guess you get to say that we don't know why God created a universe full of arbitrariness and suffering, but on the other hand, he is omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, and his ways are not our ways, and this is the best of all possible worlds.
Hmm, there's something fishy about this.
The really fishy bit is that God had to create the universe this way, and suffering and pain and death are inevitable, and it couldn't be any other way, but it will be one day, even though it can't be.
'strewth and I thought I was pushing the boat out! Yeaaahhh. Us and Job eh?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
God wants the best for us. But the best for us might not be the most comfortable, or pleasant, or even what we want at all.
If your definition of 'best' is that beach with the cold rum punch, it is possible that your concept is not only small, it's boring. I think it's Lewis who says that not only is Heaven better than we imagine, it is better than we can imagine. His analogy is to childhood. When you were four, your idea of the very best in life -- pizza, let us say -- was quite different from the concept you may have in your thirties. Your vision in adulthood might well include pizza. But it will encompass much more.
Including Auschwitz, brain cancer in children, and earthquakes? Oh no, they come from the powers and principalities!
Can you think of a better explanation? Really, if you're going to take those things seriously (and we must), you're left with either there is no God, God is a giant ***... or some version of spiritual warfare. What I/Open Theism would advocate is more nuanced than the old school spiritual warfare creed, but I think it's the only way to go, at least for me.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
It explains NOTHING at all.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Can you postulate an outcome, a solution, that would make the sufferings of concentration camps worth while? Put it another way -- can you imagine those who died at Bergen Belsen somewhere, praising God? If you and I can imagine it, I am certain God can.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Nothing makes it 'worth while'. Absolutely nothing. Something could make it irrelevant.
The mystery is, as Karl says, why we HAVE to have meaningless arbitrary suffering before all will be well.
God knows. May be.
I can't imagine we'll be any the wiser, or need to be, in resurrection. May be it can only be understood if one is transcendent.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Can you postulate an outcome, a solution, that would make the sufferings of concentration camps worth while? Put it another way -- can you imagine those who died at Bergen Belsen somewhere, praising God? If you and I can imagine it, I am certain God can.
No, I can't.
What I can grasp is the notion that if we are to be free to love, we have to be free to choose. Which means we can choose hate, murder, war. And not just humans, but other created (spiritual) beings have free choice. And just like our free choices usually impact other innocent bystanders, so the free choices of free spiritual beings may impact innocent bystanders. So the only justification for the screwed up things that happen in the world IMHO is the notion that in order to be open to the possibility of love, the world had to be open to the possibility of hate. I believe all suffering, including death itself, stems from that.
I don't think this is the best possible life, even tho my own personal life is pretty comfy. But I know too much about what other people struggle with to call this "best possible." But I do have a hope that life can-- and will one day-- be different. I think part of what we're experiencing in this life is the learning pains as we learn to trust in God's ways so that we can voluntarily enter into his Kingdom. Which I believe one day will reign where we will in freedom choose to be a part of something better.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
The mystery is, as Karl says, why we HAVE to have meaningless arbitrary suffering before all will be well.
I'm trying to imagine a world without gravity, so that nothing can arbitrarily or accidentally squish other things.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
The problem I think we have now with this explanation is "when"? Apart from not having us in it, this universe was pretty much how it is now before we even went into the trees in the first place, never mind came down from them, with disease, death and, presuming that non-human animals can nevertheless be self-aware, suffering. This is why I don't entirely agree with people saying that modern science isn't a problem for Christianity. It is. It may not be insurmountable, but it presents very great difficulties for the "created perfect then we buggered it up" narrative.
As you said, "when" is key. I hold the corruption happened at the very beginning-- the first moment of the Big Bang or whatever is current theory of the origin of the universe.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
The mystery is, as Karl says, why we HAVE to have meaningless arbitrary suffering before all will be well.
I'm trying to imagine a world without gravity, so that nothing can arbitrarily or accidentally squish other things.
And no onchocerciasis. Heaven. The Resurrection. So little children don't get their eyes eaten inside out.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
The problem I think we have now with this explanation is "when"? Apart from not having us in it, this universe was pretty much how it is now before we even went into the trees in the first place, never mind came down from them, with disease, death and, presuming that non-human animals can nevertheless be self-aware, suffering. This is why I don't entirely agree with people saying that modern science isn't a problem for Christianity. It is. It may not be insurmountable, but it presents very great difficulties for the "created perfect then we buggered it up" narrative.
As you said, "when" is key. I hold the corruption happened at the very beginning-- the first moment of the Big Bang or whatever is current theory of the origin of the universe.
God created a wicked and corrupt world? This still raises the question, as you have brought up the Big Bang (though with some disdain)—at what point in the evolution did God start to love us? Did he love us as trilobites? Did God have a 'special plans' for each trilobite? Or was only Cro-Magnon man that loved—or later? It took an awfully long time until they finally found the Christian God, so perhaps hated those creatures that he made and then just got bored?
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
at what point in the evolution did God start to love us? Did he love us as trilobites? Did God have a 'special plans' for each trilobite? Or was only Cro-Magnon man that loved—or later? It took an awfully long time until they finally found the Christian God, so perhaps hated those creatures that he made and then just got bored?
It is hard to imagine how it is that God exists outside of time. But supposing that He does, He would be simultaneously in the past present and future, so these questions would not be relevant.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
It is hard to imagine how it is that God exists outside of time. But supposing that He does, He would be simultaneously in the past present and future, so these questions would not be relevant.
In many ways no questions about God would be relevant - as absolutely anything would be possible for her.
But my question - relevant or not - would be 'why keep us so much in the dark about God once we have the need to know?' The standard Christian answers simply don't wash as there were so many billions of people searching for God long before the Judeo-Christian era. Why keep them in the dark?
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Boogie--
You might look up the idea of "general revelation" or "natural revelation"--basically, the idea that God built at least some findable truth into the world. Some people think that covers people who lived before Jesus, or live now and don't know about him.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
at what point in the evolution did God start to love us? Did he love us as trilobites? Did God have a 'special plans' for each trilobite? Or was only Cro-Magnon man that loved—or later? It took an awfully long time until they finally found the Christian God, so perhaps hated those creatures that he made and then just got bored?
It is hard to imagine how it is that God exists outside of time. But supposing that He does, He would be simultaneously in the past present and future, so these questions would not be relevant.
Freddy, you can't have it and not have it.
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
But my question - relevant or not - would be 'why keep us so much in the dark about God once we have the need to know?'
My answer is similar to Golden Key's. The answers are there. It is just a question of finding them.
Personally, I find the answers in Swedenborg. Others find them in other sources. Others are unconvinced. There are a lot of options, including the conclusion that there simply are no answers.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
But my question - relevant or not - would be 'why keep us so much in the dark about God once we have the need to know?'
My answer is similar to Golden Key's. The answers are there. It is just a question of finding them.
Personally, I find the answers in Swedenborg. Others find them in other sources. Others are unconvinced. There are a lot of options, including the conclusion that there simply are no answers.
I disagree; the answers are there in Christian texts and thinking, it's just that they are either incorrect or deeply unsatisfactory. Notice how much time has been spent in this thread wondering why God does evil things. Why did God (or the Godhead) stop performing miracles? It must have been very compelling evidence to see Jesus fly, but we don't get anything of the sort. That's a shame.
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Freddy, you can't have it and not have it.
You mean simultaneously have it and not have it?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
I disagree; the answers are there in Christian texts and thinking, it's just that they are either incorrect or deeply unsatisfactory.
I also agree that they are there in the Christian texts. Whether they are satisfactory or not depends on how you understand them.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
A Feminine Force
Ship's Onager
# 7812
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
My eyes glaze over. It is not worth the energy, to create a boring creation. I repeat: stuff has to happen.
You know what? I am with you on this.
If we accept as true that we are made in His image, then our desire for drama must be informed by His own.
In the western esoteric tradition, there is deep meaning associated with dramaturgy. Jacques' "All the world's a stage..." speech reveals something profound about what I believe is the true nature of our human experience.
Because I have memories of past incarnations, the problem of evil doesn't bother me as much, because I know I have played many different roles in both male and female costumes.
I think the idea that is most difficult to swallow is the idea that we would invent such a funhouse filled with horrors and atrocities perpetrated by ourselves upon ourselves.
But this is in fact what we have done, and continue to do, and God hasn't prevented it.
So the deeper question is, why would we do this? I think we have to look beyond a single incarnation and a single state of being (occupying a human-suit) to bring closure to the question.
AFF
--------------------
C2C - The Cure for What Ails Ya?
Posts: 2115 | From: Kingdom of Heaven | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
The problem I think we have now with this explanation is "when"? Apart from not having us in it, this universe was pretty much how it is now before we even went into the trees in the first place, never mind came down from them, with disease, death and, presuming that non-human animals can nevertheless be self-aware, suffering. This is why I don't entirely agree with people saying that modern science isn't a problem for Christianity. It is. It may not be insurmountable, but it presents very great difficulties for the "created perfect then we buggered it up" narrative.
As you said, "when" is key. I hold the corruption happened at the very beginning-- the first moment of the Big Bang or whatever is current theory of the origin of the universe.
What corruption?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Now Komensky has got me worrying about trilobites, but Christian friends assure me that they didn't have souls, therefore were not at peril in the attacks from hostile spiritual forces. However, they were part of a mass extinction, so who knows how that happened.
However, what about Australopithecus, were they at peril? Surely, God would realize that they had advanced beyond trilobites, and might need some kind of redeemer?
Extinct again, however, so there is plenty of wear and tear going on. Never mind. Look on the bright side of life.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
cliffdweller wrote:
quote:
Can you think of a better explanation? Really, if you're going to take those things seriously (and we must), you're left with either there is no God, God is a giant ***... or some version of spiritual warfare. What I/Open Theism would advocate is more nuanced than the old school spiritual warfare creed, but I think it's the only way to go, at least for me.
It's an interesting question, well, I suppose it is. I must admit as I've got older, explanations don't really twang my zither. I mean, there are an endless number - say, that gravity is caused by God pulling things down. Is that satisfying? It just seems irrelevant to me, although it may be true.
Advocates of a 3-omnis God certainly seem to have to perform gyrations to resolve all the contradictions, however, I suppose gyrations are quite pleasing. It reminds me of Yeats, that things are 'turning and turning in the widening gyre', ironically from the poem 'The Second Coming'.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
cliffdweller wrote:
quote:
Can you think of a better explanation? Really, if you're going to take those things seriously (and we must), you're left with either there is no God, God is a giant ***... or some version of spiritual warfare. What I/Open Theism would advocate is more nuanced than the old school spiritual warfare creed, but I think it's the only way to go, at least for me.
It's an interesting question, well, I suppose it is. I must admit as I've got older, explanations don't really twang my zither. I mean, there are an endless number - say, that gravity is caused by God pulling things down. Is that satisfying? It just seems irrelevant to me, although it may be true.
Advocates of a 3-omnis God certainly seem to have to perform gyrations to resolve all the contradictions, however, I suppose gyrations are quite pleasing. It reminds me of Yeats, that things are 'turning and turning in the widening gyre', ironically from the poem 'The Second Coming'.
Actually, Quez, that chimes very nicely with teleological theologies as well as those of divine command. The rock stays on the ground because that is where God wants it to be—that is its proper place.
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
My impression is that Islam has retained this degree of God-control, or whatever you call it, whereas Christianity has tended to let it go.
Thus a theologian such as al-Ghazali talks about God creating every moment, in fact, I think this is known as occasionalism.
However, Christianity made the crucial distinction between primary cause and secondary causes, and it's the latter that science investigates.
Cynics say however, that the notion of secondary causes led to Protestantism, which led to atheism. You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment.
(Actually, Islam does accept secondary causes, but in rather a different way).
[ 21. April 2016, 12:16: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
The problem I think we have now with this explanation is "when"? Apart from not having us in it, this universe was pretty much how it is now before we even went into the trees in the first place, never mind came down from them, with disease, death and, presuming that non-human animals can nevertheless be self-aware, suffering. This is why I don't entirely agree with people saying that modern science isn't a problem for Christianity. It is. It may not be insurmountable, but it presents very great difficulties for the "created perfect then we buggered it up" narrative.
As you said, "when" is key. I hold the corruption happened at the very beginning-- the first moment of the Big Bang or whatever is current theory of the origin of the universe.
God created a wicked and corrupt world?.
No, that's not what I'm suggesting. God created a perfect world, but one that is free-- for us, but also for other created beings (in this case, spiritual entities-- the "principalities and powers" of Eph. 6). So, while creation was good and perfect, at some (very very early) point in the evolutionary process (e.g. the first moment of Big Bang) those free creatures intervened in the evolutionary process ("corruption" to use the language of the Bible).
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
This still raises the question, as you have brought up the Big Bang (though with some disdain)—at what point in the evolution did God start to love us? Did he love us as trilobites? Did God have a 'special plans' for each trilobite? Or was only Cro-Magnon man that loved—or later? It took an awfully long time until they finally found the Christian God, so perhaps hated those creatures that he made and then just got bored?
I don't know where you're getting the disdain from-- I can assure you that's not the case. My aside about "whatever theory" is simply to acknowledge that we're beyond my area of expertise, so I am dependent there on those with greater knowledge than I.
I believe God always loved and always will love his creation, all of his creatures. Creation may be broken/marred, but it is still beautiful and beloved.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
cliffdweller wrote:
quote:
Can you think of a better explanation? Really, if you're going to take those things seriously (and we must), you're left with either there is no God, God is a giant ***... or some version of spiritual warfare. What I/Open Theism would advocate is more nuanced than the old school spiritual warfare creed, but I think it's the only way to go, at least for me.
It's an interesting question, well, I suppose it is. I must admit as I've got older, explanations don't really twang my zither. I mean, there are an endless number - say, that gravity is caused by God pulling things down. Is that satisfying? It just seems irrelevant to me, although it may be true.
Advocates of a 3-omnis God certainly seem to have to perform gyrations to resolve all the contradictions, however, I suppose gyrations are quite pleasing. It reminds me of Yeats, that things are 'turning and turning in the widening gyre', ironically from the poem 'The Second Coming'.
Of course, the "3-omnis" God is not the Open view that I'm advocating for.
There is something to be said for the "no explanations" position. Chalking it up to "mystery" does demonstrate a proper humility, of course, and recognition that there is so much beyond our understanding. And it sure helps fill in those gaps.
But the problem I have with "mystery" as an answer is that it makes God ultimately unknowable. It distances us from God, when I think the whole point of Jesus and the Bible is to help us to know God. And knowing God changes how we live. Theology matters-- because it changes so much in the way we relate to God and to one another. Sure, we can't figure the whole thing out, and we're gonna get a bunch of it dead wrong. But the effort I think to understand God and the universe does impact our lives in significant ways. ymmv.
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
What corruption?
You naughty boy, you know my answer to that-- you're baiting me.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
[QUOTE][qb]Christianity believes creation is fallen and needs to be redeemed.
The problem I think we have now with this explanation is "when"? Apart from not having us in it, this universe was pretty much how it is now before we even went into the trees in the first place, never mind came down from them, with disease, death and, presuming that non-human animals can nevertheless be self-aware, suffering.
It's true that I don't think we can believe in the Fall as something that happened to two ancestral human beings. I do think it's possible to believe that the Fall is an extratemporal event. Every time I've advanced that idea I've got the response that it's terribly science-fictional. Well, so were satellites.
(I'm not quite sure why being too sf is an objection to people who imply they would, in the absence of the geological evidence, be ok with a talking snake.)
At some point, if one thinks that there's reasonable grounds for monotheism, one has to decide whether the positions that commits one to are too implausible for the original grounds. Or contrariwise, not.
quote:
quote:
Psychological health seems to require a general underlying assumption that the universe doesn't have too much arbitrary suffering in it, an attitude that fundamentally things are alright. Since the empirical facts are at best equivocal in their support for that, we can either accept that human existence is absurd, or else that in some way not available to direct empirical observation the universe is indeed fundamentally alright. The claim that God exists is I think one name for the belief that the universe is in some non-empirical way such that psychological health is justified.
This is I think very true. Unfortunately it does play straight into the idea of religion as wish-fulfillment.
Reality is what you have to believe in in order to function properly.
Ok, a bit of an oversimplification. But I think there's a difference between wish-fulfillment of a wish that one could in principle discard or grow out of, and wish-fulfillment of a wish that one can't do without.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
