<< Any God that prevents such actions only ensures that his creations exist in
the "My Little Pony" universe or something similar. You insist that you be
free to tread your own path, yet you castigate a God, who, by letting
everyone
else do so as well, allows evil into the universe. If he's going to let you
live as you see fit, then he's going to have to do the same thing with
everyone else. Or do you, like the Rev. Robertson, insist that whatever God
does to "other people" is just fine, and what they deserve? He wants God is
going to iwipe out Orlando with a hurricane, you want God to limit my freedom
of action so that he can fit into your definition of what is acceptable.
Face it, all this talk of not beleiving in a God who allows "horrible
diseases, accidents and the like." is so much sophomoric posturing that
allows you to live in a solipsistic universe where only your actions have
meaning or impact. Everything that doesn't fit into your world view or your
morals is dismissed, allowing you to feel quite superior to a God whom you
assure yourself doesn't exist anyway. The nice thing about the "light of
reason" is that if you truly adhere to it, is that you can NEVER assure
yourself that anything is impossible. Anytime you do so you've exchange the
"cold light of reason" for the warm, blissful confines of ignorance. >>
Noticed your admonishment regarding insulting someone who simply disagreed
with you...Wondered about it in light of this post.
Anyway. You seem to have attributed a great many traits to me after having
read that post. I'm not at all sure of how to disabuse you of them. I don't
feel "superior to god ". I don't think any such being exists to feel superior
to. I don't want god to fix everything just for me. But could you please
explain to me what function AIDS, or tuberculosis, or take your pick,, have in
perpetuating free will? Why does it have to be all or nothing? You claim that
I seem to want a perfect world. I never said any such thing. I simply
wondered, in the context of the thread regarding reconciliation of an
omnipotent/ominbenevolent god with the existence of evil. I equated the
existence of such things as disease with a seeming willingness on the part of
this god to create hardship for no apparent reason. Is cancer somehow a
neccesary penalty to suffer for the gift of freewill? I can't believe any
such thing.
To simplify:
1) I don't believe that this god being exists.
2) If such a being exists, the evidence available to me suggests that
he/she/it is at best uncaring and at worst remarkably cruel. In either case I
don't care to have anything to do with he/she/it
3) As you pointed out, one must keep an open mind, but, others on this list
have pointed out that it must not be so open that ones brains fall out. You
stated that a rational thinker must admit that anything is possible. True as
far as it goes. This thinker must also attempt to assign some degree of
probability to these possibilities. Speaking only for myself, I find the
probability of the existence of a omnibenevolent god to be faint to say the
least.
I don't want to drag this out forever as can always be the case in any
discussion involving god(s) and religion. Judging by your post, I feel that I
must have offended you in some way. This was not my intention. Rather I was
responding to a particular thread and voicing an opinion. Nothing more.
best, Cori