Does the Haiti earthquake prove that there is no god?

[Ozme52]

No, I read virtually none of his post-carotid-surgery fiction.

I afraid you lost me completely here. Maybe I do not know him well enough, I only read two of his books, Job being one on them.

Ah, I read it as a literary opinion - but it was literal ;-) I did not know he had had an operation, and that that changed his writing. Interesting.

Ah. Yes. I was indeed being literal. I enjoyed his earlier work far more than that which he produced afterwards. In part, because, for good or ill, I like my protagonists to be clearly male or female. Gender bending and bi-curious heroes and heroines... I don't find them engaging my imagination so I lose interest in their struggle and the book becomes tedious.

I'm not phobic about it mind you... just not curious enough to continue suspending my disbelief (as one must often do with science-fiction.)

Now... back to the topic of God.

[Thorne]

Why does God have to stop a natural disaster from occuring? Why is it that if he allows one to happen that all of a sudden he's hateful and doesn't give a shit about anybody?

If I were walking down the street and saw someone attacking another person, and did nothing to stop it, or even stood by and watched, I would be as guilty of a crime as the perpetrator, wouldn't I?

Or if I saw a man walking onto a plane with a bomb strapped to his chest, wouldn't I be guilty of killing innocent people if I failed to notify the authorities?

I look upon the idea of God in this same way. He COULD prevent the disaster. He doesn't, which implicates him in the suffering of the victims. Even if we assume that there is a reason for the disaster itself, God COULD protect the people, preventing unnecessary death and injury and all the horrors that the victims must suffer.

The fact that God does not intervene in these disasters leads me to two possible conclusions:
1 - Like a scientist testing bacterial colonies for resistance to antibiotics, God simply observes the results of these disasters, seeing which people survive and which do not. The suffering of those who survive in a damaged condition is immaterial to him. The survivors must live with the consequences.

2 - There is no God. Natural disasters happen, and people die and are injured. The survivors must live with the consequences.

In both cases the results are the same. Naturally, my opinion is that the second case is true, but even if I'm wrong and the first case is closer to the truth, this is certainly not the God of Abraham and Mohammad, and is most definitely not a being worthy of any kind of worship or adoration.

Now, one can probably come up with many other possible explanations for the apparent absence of any intervention by God, but they all seem to end the same way: The survivors must live with the consequences.

[Saheli]

I am not sure I can follow your argument. I read your text as saying God did not cause the disaster, but also did not prevent it, and why should he?
And further that to think that the reason God allows this to happen is a test, or proves that he is hateful, is ridiculous.

Yes, that's basically what I'm saying.

So what is the conclusion?? Given the ability to prevent, why does he allow it?

This is a question for which I doubt anyone has an answer. Everyone has theories, but nobody knows why. If it was obvious, this thread wouldn't exist. I don't know why things are allowed to happen any more than anybody else does. But I don't believe that just because they do happen and because suffering exists that God is misanthropic. And I don't believe that such happenings mean that if God exists, he set the universe in motion and then observes without interfering. I don't understand why there must only be two options. If we can all admit that we don't know, then why can't we admit that there may be more than these conclusions? Perhaps a conclusion exists which we have not thought of that is correct. Humans are extremely intelligent, but is it really out of the question to consider that maybe we just can't figure this one out? And if we can't, does that mean that God is hateful, uninvolved, or nonexistant? I just can't help but think that we tend to be very limited in our thinking and wonder if there are other options that we have not considered or cannot comprehend...

The folowing question is also not meant as anything other than a genuie interest in these matters: why should Christians love and follow Christ no matter what?

Well, in my response I only mentioned Christians, but after submitting it I started thinking that really it applies to everyone. Anytime we have a belief or an action that we really believe in, we will stand by that prinicple no matter what. So Christians should love and follow Christ no matter what only if they truly believe they are believing the right thing. If they aren't convinced that Christ is the true King, then what's the point except being fake? Maybe a show for some shallow societal gains in some way...I don't know. Why should people who support human rights follow that end no matter what? Because that's what they believe in, and if they didn't do what they felt was the right thing to do then they are not being true to themselves, and in my opinion life's fulfillment comes from being true to yourself.

What does God want with Christians? What is the relationship, if I may put it this way, between Christ and Christians?

The answer to the question about what God wants is tricky, because it opens up so many debates. I believe that God wants respect, love, honor...This begs the question, "How can you respect/love/honor God when he allows natural disasters? When good people suffer in the world? When he remains intangible?" I view the relationship between Christ and Christians just like I view the relationship between a Dom and a sub. Love must be present on both sides, along with trust...the Bible states that the relationship is a familial one. Many times Christians are called "sons of God". In my opinion, if you do not feel you can trust that God exists or in the goodness of God, why would you waste your time being a Christian? But if you do believe in God and can trust in his goodness, and if you decide to become a follower of Christ, then you should seek to honor him in all you do because you have placed your trust and loyalty in him.

God gives, God takes, his name be praised. Why?

Well this ties in with what I said a minute ago. If you don't believe in the ultimate goodness of God, then the 'God takes' part will be so difficult/hurtful that praising becomes completely out of the question. So I believe that line would only be applicable if you already believe in Christ...and by applicable I don't really mean 'the validity of the application' so much as 'the possibility of the application'.

Sometimes I feel on the track on something hard to put into words - like the faith some people have can help them through anything, that whatever happens there is still a special kind of love there. Some pagan faiths are like that too.

Other times I think that many Chrisitian religions seem to think of human beings as worthless things who can only pray that God will take pity on them so they won't go to hell, and who'll have to take anything God throws at them like dogs with a bad Master. That is Job's story for me.

Would you like to say more on this matter, to sort out these thoughts?

I think that faith and love are the two most powerful forces in the universe: I'm sure some would disagree. And like you, I have moments where I feel like faith could literally move mountains (reference accidental). We remember stories of faith much longer than stories of despair about people who had no faith. Why is that? So that's why I think the way I do about faith. But faith is very tricky, because it is easily used a crutch...and how do you know when it is real in someone else?

Unfortunately, most Christians aren't real Christians. They enjoy bragging about how wonderful they are and how close to God they are (excuse me while I puke)...and they just LOVE telling you how to live YOUR life. I believe Christians who use scare tactics (or any other religion for that matter) to get people to believe so they can escape something undesirable is despicable and something that God does not appreciate. And I believe it's that very tactic that has made Christians seem so evil to others: self-righteous, self-centered, condeming, small-minded. What really pisses me off about Christians is that they don't even take the time to try and figure out why they believe things...I guess it's more convenient to just throw out a, "God works in mysterious ways" followed up with a, "I'll pray for you."

These people are a disgrace, and their relationship to God is nonexistant. As far as Hell, this may begin another debate. The theology of the Bible goes something like this: Fallen people go to Hell because they are not worthy of Heaven, which is perfect. (And again, this ties into the "If God allows it, he is guilty, whether directly or indirectly," argument) Jesus was sent to provide a blood sacrifice so that people COULD get into Heaven. The theology, then, purports that God doesn't send people to Hell; they go there automatically. Further, God went out of his way to make sure that they could get into Heaven, because he loves them.

Now I know the argument will probably be that if God is in complete control of eveything, why did he have to do anything other than just change the law of Hell (or however you want to say it) with a thought? Why the trouble of sending Jesus? And beyond that, if people still go to Hell, then how much does he love them anyway?

I have no answer for the first question. I spend a lot of time introspectively with apologetics but have not wrestled too much with this. I have no idea. It seems, though, that God, who is in complete control over everything, is now subject--bound, if you will--to laws that he created. Why is that? How can you be over all if you are bound by a law? I simply don't know.

For Jesus, perhaps to demonstrate love. And for the third question, how much did they love him might be a better way of putting it.

I am only showing different ways of looking at the issue. I hope nobody misunderstands me to think that I feel my ideas are superior.

[Saheli]

If I were walking down the street and saw someone attacking another person, and did nothing to stop it, or even stood by and watched, I would be as guilty of a crime as the perpetrator, wouldn't I?

I look upon the idea of God in this same way. He COULD prevent the disaster. He doesn't, which implicates him in the suffering of the victims. Even if we assume that there is a reason for the disaster itself, God COULD protect the people, preventing unnecessary death and injury and all the horrors that the victims must suffer.

The fact that God does not intervene in these disasters leads me to two possible conclusions:
1 - Like a scientist testing bacterial colonies for resistance to antibiotics, God simply observes the results of these disasters, seeing which people survive and which do not. The suffering of those who survive in a damaged condition is immaterial to him. The survivors must live with the consequences.

2 - There is no God. Natural disasters happen, and people die and are injured. The survivors must live with the consequences.

In both cases the results are the same. Naturally, my opinion is that the second case is true, but even if I'm wrong and the first case is closer to the truth, this is certainly not the God of Abraham and Mohammad, and is most definitely not a being worthy of any kind of worship or adoration.

Now, one can probably come up with many other possible explanations for the apparent absence of any intervention by God, but they all seem to end the same way: The survivors must live with the consequences.

I completely agree that God, having not prevented the earthquake when he could, implicates him in the suffering of the victims. And now the question should not only be what does this say about God, but also what does this say about suffering? As far as God is concerned, why are the only two options that he is uninvolved or hates people? As far as suffering is concerned, again who of us could really say for certainty that any answer is correct? But there are some things that we do know about suffering: suffering gets people's attention...when someone notices suffering they go help meet needs. When people suffer sometimes they learn things they otherwise might not learn. I am NOT saying that that these are the reasons why the earthquake happened. I am only saying that there are many things to consider. So if God, who could prevent himself from being implicated in the sufferings of these innocent people allow himself to be so implicated, the larger question is why? Is God an idiot? He just didn't consider what people would think if he didn't stop the earthquake? Does he want people to think of him as a hateful creator who doesn't care about the creatures he created? Is he just not there at all, and all these questions are a waste of time? I think all the questions we can come up with are worth considering.

You say in the end of your post that other options may exist but all end the same way, with the survivors bearing the pains of the event. Yes, of course that's right. And to that point we have no idea what those consequences will mean to each individual, although I think it's pretty safe to say that this will probably (hopefully!) be the most traumatic, painful (physically/mentally) event each will ever have to endure. We all have burdens, and I am NOT trying to minimize suffering; please don't misunderstand. I am saying that everyone in this world suffers a myriad of hurts throughout life for different reasons. Those who don't believe in any kind of God or supreme being is likely to believe that hurt is random and impersonal. Some people believe that all hardships are a result of sin, and there are probably dozens of theories inbetween the two extremes. The people will have to live with what happened forever; for some it might ruin their life: perhaps they will never get over what happened. For some it might renew their faith in people, finding that people are much more compassionate than once thought. For some it might be the beginning of a new life: I've heard on the news that Obama is thinking about passing laws that would allow more Haitians (hope I spelled that right) to live in America. The point is that we have no idea what the actual implications of the consequences suffered by the people mean. We can only guess. And while nobody here would argue that the tragedy was anything less of horrendous, we simply cannot say that nothing good can come from it. I am not using that statement to say, "See, so God was good to not prevent the earthquake...some Haitians can live in America now." That is not what I believe at all.

Like I said, I have no answer as to why God wouldn't interfere. I just don't believe that it means he doesn't care, that he isn't involved, or that he isn't there.

[Saheli]

Other times I think that many Chrisitian religions seem to think of human beings as worthless things who can only pray that God will take pity on them so they won't go to hell, and who'll have to take anything God throws at them like dogs with a bad Master. That is Job's story for me.

Would you like to say more on this matter, to sort out these thoughts?
-thir

Christians who believe that they should just take whatever is throws at them are no different than other people..I mean, everyone has bad things thrown at them all the time. We just deal the best we can, hopefully learn something, and move on. I understand you're specifically talking about Job, wondering why he was so happy...well, he wasn't. My thoughts on Christians who look at the religion as being slave to a bad Master are ignorant and in my opinion not true Christians, because (as I mentioned earlier) what is the point of being a Christian (further, how CAN you be a Christian) if you do not believe in the goodness of God? I would NEVER agree to be a slave to a master I felt was evil or didn't care about me. So my response would be anyone who says their master is a bad master does not follow that master. Either they follow with disdain or do not follow at all because they do not have respect for him. So any religious person that shows disdain for a master they claim to serve is a false believer, and I wouldn't waste my time listening to anything he/she had to say.

(sorry I got long-winded and forgot to address that last point)

[13'sbadkitty]

the main reason i have opted out of religion is because of the this is the proof of God stuff and that is the same reason i opted out of atheism for the this is the proof of no god stuff. i have so many meaningful experiences and moments in my life that aren't exactly on my fun to have had happen list and they end up being on my thats how i know there is a God list. the essence of being human to me is to wonder and ponder and try to find for ones self is there or isn't there a God and what does that mean to me? rather than what do i think that means to you...sorry couldn't resist my own 2 cents being thrown in.

[Thorne]

I stopped believing when the only answer I could get to my questions was, "You have to have faith." I found I had no faith, not without evidence, and I could find no evidence. The older I've gotten and the more I've learned, the less evidence I find for the existence of any kind of supernatural being, be it the Judeo/Christian/Islamic God or any other.

IF there is a god out there, it does not seem to have any meaningful interaction with us here on Earth, and in fact doesn't seem to have any interaction at all. Everything we learn about nature proceeds exactly as our science says it should if there were no gods. And no one, in all the history of humanity, has ever been able to present verifiable evidence of any such interaction. It's all anecdotes and interpretations.

If you want to show that God exists, just show some evidence, which can be tested and verified. Maybe all those who have died in Haiti were non-Christians? Or maybe they were all atheists? Or perhaps they were all Christians, taken from the scene so they wouldn't have to suffer the aftereffects? Could it be that God only killed all the greedy, evil, criminals?

But history shows us that the killings in these disasters, whether man-made or "acts of God", are quite homogeneous. Certainly the poor tend to die in greater numbers than the rich, but there are more poor people than rich, and they tend to live in riskier environments, so that's not really meaningful.

It's quite true that, IF there is a God, we can not understand his reasons for doing anything. He is so far above us that our meager minds cannot comprehend him. But that does not make him worthy of our worship and adoration, especially if his morality is so far removed from our own. We cannot know anything about him, cannot know anything about his plans for us, either now or after death. And if his plan for the universe is set, what makes us think he will alter it just because we ask?

So until we can see uncontrovertible evidence of such a god, or any god (and by that, I mean something akin to a burning bush in the middle of Times Square doing a live televised interview with Barbara Walters!) I'll have to continue with my unbelief.

Unless I get struck by lightning!

[Saheli]

I stopped believing when the only answer I could get to my questions was, "You have to have faith." I found I had no faith, not without evidence, and I could find no evidence. The older I've gotten and the more I've learned, the less evidence I find for the existence of any kind of supernatural being, be it the Judeo/Christian/Islamic God or any other.

IF there is a god out there, it does not seem to have any meaningful interaction with us here on Earth, and in fact doesn't seem to have any interaction at all. Everything we learn about nature proceeds exactly as our science says it should if there were no gods. And no one, in all the history of humanity, has ever been able to present verifiable evidence of any such interaction. It's all anecdotes and interpretations.

If you want to show that God exists, just show some evidence, which can be tested and verified. Maybe all those who have died in Haiti were non-Christians? Or maybe they were all atheists? Or perhaps they were all Christians, taken from the scene so they wouldn't have to suffer the aftereffects? Could it be that God only killed all the greedy, evil, criminals?

But history shows us that the killings in these disasters, whether man-made or "acts of God", are quite homogeneous. Certainly the poor tend to die in greater numbers than the rich, but there are more poor people than rich, and they tend to live in riskier environments, so that's not really meaningful.

It's quite true that, IF there is a God, we can not understand his reasons for doing anything. He is so far above us that our meager minds cannot comprehend him. But that does not make him worthy of our worship and adoration, especially if his morality is so far removed from our own. We cannot know anything about him, cannot know anything about his plans for us, either now or after death. And if his plan for the universe is set, what makes us think he will alter it just because we ask?

So until we can see uncontrovertible evidence of such a god, or any god (and by that, I mean something akin to a burning bush in the middle of Times Square doing a live televised interview with Barbara Walters!) I'll have to continue with my unbelief.

Unless I get struck by lightning!

I am not trying to convince anybody of anything. I am just saying how I feel; I realize it isn't extremely popular. I saw a quote about faith once, "Faith is not believing in spite of evidence; faith is obeying in spite of consequences." To me, that means doing whatever I believe in, whether it's in God or in helping the homeless person downtown..I think more people should obey their conscience.. There is no empirical test I can give to prove God, and I don't care to try. You are entitled to your beliefs, and I don't want to interfere with that at all. There was a man once, who sought to disprove the existence of God and has said that in trying to disprove he actually ended up believing in God...seems like an interesting story, but I don't know a lot about it.

There will never be any fool-proof evidence either way; this argument will continue until the end of time. Until then we're all just wading around in our best guesses and (like you said) interpretations of the things we see and feel. I love listening to people who think differently than I do, though. It's amazing how unique we an all be.

[13'sbadkitty]

for me and what i needed as far as evidence (btw i have no major world religious views at all) was not what anyone else needs for evidence. Maybe the same thing that got my fundamentalist mother out of bed in the morning would have had me put a bullet in my brain. The argument that God can't be proved is not an effective argument for the lack of God anymore than have faith is an effective argument for believing. During the 80's and all the God caused the aids epidemic crap got me to leave the church. i can say that i have absolute evidence of a God in my life that is what i need for me. Unfortunately in my eyes, people are always the problem. Why oh why would God cause an earthquake or Tsunami or a car jacking? Just because there is evil in the world and catastrophes, that means God causes them or doesn't mind them? i don't see how that means that at all.

[DuncanONeil]

Such events do not disprove God!

This was the title of a program on BBC 2 today.

An age old discussion is of course that if God (Gods,Goddess) is all powerful and loving, why does he allow such things to happen?

Several in the program talked about these things being a test for your faith, or a way to improve your character because you need important choices in your life. (Apperently this would apply to survivors, whether to help each other or fight over food.)

Some said life was a gift however long or short, and we should be happy for what we get.

So, does things like the earhquake prove that there is no God and if not, why are these things allowed to happen?

Are the Gods (if they exist) really interested in us on a personal basis?

[Thorne]

I saw a quote about faith once, "Faith is not believing in spite of evidence; faith is obeying in spite of consequences." To me, that means doing whatever I believe in, whether it's in God or in helping the homeless person downtown..I think more people should obey their conscience..

You do realize that this can also apply to murderers? A man in Kansas was just convicted of killing an abortion doctor, because he was doing what he believed in. Of course, he tried to avoid the consequences, so perhaps his faith wasn't all that strong.

There is no empirical test I can give to prove God, and I don't care to try. You are entitled to your beliefs, and I don't want to interfere with that at all.

I don't try to destroy people's faith, but I do think people have to understand their beliefs, and especially to understand how those beliefs can be twisted by leaders of organized religions. Atrocities like 9/11, or the slaughter of gays in Uganda, or the kidnapping of children in Haiti are only some of the consequences.

There will never be any fool-proof evidence either way; this argument will continue until the end of time. Until then we're all just wading around in our best guesses and (like you said) interpretations of the things we see and feel. I love listening to people who think differently than I do, though. It's amazing how unique we an all be.

I agree that there can never be fool-proof evidence to deny the existence of gods. There COULD be fool-proof evidence FOR the existence, but (conveniently) these all-powerful beings just don't seem to want to provide such evidence.

[Thorne]

Just because there is evil in the world and catastrophes, that means God causes them or doesn't mind them? i don't see how that means that at all.

It's not that this is evidence against gods in general, just that it is evidence against the standard J/C/I god of the bible. The point is that we don't know, cannot know, whether such gods exist without direct evidence. You can believe, or not believe, whatever you wish, but without tangible evidence it's no better than make-believe.

[Saheli]

You do realize that this can also apply to murderers? A man in Kansas was just convicted of killing an abortion doctor, because he was doing what he believed in. Of course, he tried to avoid the consequences, so perhaps his faith wasn't all that strong.

I see what you mean. I don't mean that everyone should follow their conscience without any boundaries. I think that's dangerous; you pointed out a very good reason why we need boundaries. I think that we should listen to our conscience and do all we feel we should with respect to laws and the basic rights of people. The man who killed the abortion doctor may claim that he was doing what he believed in, and maybe so...but to claim Christ in that murder is ridiculous, since the Bible prohibits Christians from not only murdering, but taking revenge as well. So as far as murderers are concerned, murder is against the law; laws should always provide boundaries to what we do if we are going to be decent citizens.

I don't try to destroy people's faith, but I do think people have to understand their beliefs, and especially to understand how those beliefs can be twisted by leaders of organized religions. Atrocities like 9/11, or the slaughter of gays in Uganda, or the kidnapping of children in Haiti are only some of the consequences.

I completely agree. I think that religious leaders who capitalize on natural disasters or other atrocities so that they can 'explain' how people who suffered somehow deserved it and if only everyone could be more like whoever is doing the condeming then these things wouldn't happen are completely evil. I think that is one of the absolute worst things anyone who subscribes to any religion can do.

[Ozme52]

Such events do not disprove God!

That's it? A pronouncement? No explanation or proof offered? Not even a discourse of how you came to your opinion? In otherwords...

I should just "believe" you?

[Thorne]

That's it? A pronouncement? No explanation or proof offered? Not even a discourse of how you came to your opinion? In otherwords...

I should just "believe" you?

This is the fundamentalist tactic:
"I say it, therefore it's so."
"You can't show us a crocoduck, therefore evilution is wrong."
"I can't understand how the universe could have developed from nothing, therefore God did it."

They don't need evidence, they don't need explanations, simply pronouncements from on high.

[13'sbadkitty]

It's not that this is evidence against gods in general, just that it is evidence against the standard J/C/I god of the bible. The point is that we don't know, cannot know, whether such gods exist without direct evidence. You can believe, or not believe, whatever you wish, but without tangible evidence it's no better than make-believe.

Here's the thing for me, it may very well be make believe but it works for me. i have tangible evidence that i see as proof that if i explained may mean absolutely nothing to you at all. i watched my oh so fundamentalist mother in church 5 or 6 days and to me it was amusing but to her it brought great comfort. i don't feel that because i don't believe in Jesus that i have the right to ask her to prove it as why would i want to remove her comfort? my ex is a devout athiest and he is as arrogant about it as some born agains are fanatical. no offense to anyone at all, btw. when groups of religious people come knocking at my door to talk, while i doubt i will ever be one of them i like talking to people who enjoy their beliefs so strongly. proof to me is in the eye of the beholder.

[Thorne]

Here's the thing for me, it may very well be make believe but it works for me. i have tangible evidence that i see as proof that if i explained may mean absolutely nothing to you at all.

If it makes you comfortable, then go ahead and believe. I have no quarrel with that. I'm not trying to prove that gods don't exist. I'm only pointing out fallacies in what we are taught about these gods. Fallacies which, to my mind, tend to deny the existence of those gods.

Any evidence which you must explain, or which is only visible to you, is not tangible evidence. While it may be valid evidence for you, enough to sustain your faith, that doesn't help anyone who cannot see it for himself. But if you come to me and attempt to preach your faith as absolute truth, based upon evidence which only you can see, I'm going to preach right back at you about the fallacy of that faith. And if you try to have that belief system forced onto young minds in school as if it were fact, I'll fight against you.

[13'sbadkitty]

If it makes you comfortable, then go ahead and believe. I have no quarrel with that. I'm not trying to prove that gods don't exist. I'm only pointing out fallacies in what we are taught about these gods. Fallacies which, to my mind, tend to deny the existence of those gods.

Any evidence which you must explain, or which is only visible to you, is not tangible evidence. While it may be valid evidence for you, enough to sustain your faith, that doesn't help anyone who cannot see it for himself. But if you come to me and attempt to preach your faith as absolute truth, based upon evidence which only you can see, I'm going to preach right back at you about the fallacy of that faith. And if you try to have that belief system forced onto young minds in school as if it were fact, I'll fight against you.

i actually agree with quite alot of what you said, my beliefs include respecting others paths a valid and true for them. i don't believe i have the right to judge if their path is right. my proof of God is that i no longer use drugs as do lots of people in AA, once we stopped trying on human power. that may sound corny to someone else. do i use that on my kids? not at all! they are left to figure it out. i have done the best i can to introduce as many belief systems to them and they are left to choose one, some, none or all as they see fit. proselytizing, elitism, judgment and blame are not of God at all. that's people.

[Saheli]

do i use that on my kids? not at all! they are left to figure it out.

That's the sad part for me. We are all doing the best we can to figure out what the life around us means. If someone decides there are no gods, if someone decides there are many, if someone decides there is only one, if someone decides that god is really a state of mind...whatever a person believes, why can't other people just leave it alone? There is nothing worse than for someone to attack the way you feel about something and like Thorne said, especially when all they have to defend it is some type of, "Trust me..I know better." That's just insulting. People aren't stupid, and no matter what anyone believes, I don't think that anyone who believes something hasn't thought it through. So I wish that in this area people could just be more understanding. You don't believe the way I do? Fine...you have your reasons, and I have mine. I don't understand why people in this world can't just leave it at that.

I feel like the best thing I can do in life is try to figure out what's important to me, to try my best to not take those things for granted, and to try and leave a positive impact on those around me. It is definitely not my job to try and tell others what to think, and I'm pretty sure we can all agree that people who do that are not only annoying but leave a negative impact. 13'sbadkitty, I think it's really good that you don't try to shove your beliefs down your children's throats. I wish that more people would do the same. This world would be a much more peaceful place if we would just respect the fact that we are all intelligent creatures doing the best we can with what we have.

[Thorne]

We are all doing the best we can to figure out what the life around us means.

This is where I run into difficulties. Why does life have to mean anything? It just is. Why does there have to be something after death? Just because we want it? I would think that knowing this is all there is, this is all the life you will get, should be enough to motivate people to get the most out of that life. Skating through, hoping for some nebulous after-life is just the lazy way out.

People aren't stupid, and no matter what anyone believes, I don't think that anyone who believes something hasn't thought it through.

In my experience there are far too many people who are stupid, or who at least act stupidly. And the large majority of people who believe things don't really know why they believe it. They were raised that way, they were taught that way, so that's how it is. If they did stop to think about it, many would have to decide that they were misled their whole lives. Living in the South, I have seen an awful lot of so-called Christians who can't even understand the 4th grade level of a newspaper, much less the more challenging Bible which they so vehemently espouse.

you have your reasons, and I have mine. I don't understand why people in this world can't just leave it at that.

That works for me! Keep religion out of the schools and the government and I'll be happy to keep science and government out of the churches.

This world would be a much more peaceful place if we would just respect the fact that we are all intelligent creatures doing the best we can with what we have.

Amen!

[Saheli]

This is where I run into difficulties. Why does life have to mean anything? It just is. Why does there have to be something after death? Just because we want it? I would think that knowing this is all there is, this is all the life you will get, should be enough to motivate people to get the most out of that life. Skating through, hoping for some nebulous after-life is just the lazy way out.

lol...well, life doesn't HAVE to mean anything. If life doesn't mean anything, then the answer to what life means is nothing. So then life still means something in that it means nothing. I wasn't trying to say that it HAD to mean something...I just didn't specify that to me, it having no meaning is still its meaning to an individual...no meaning is always an option!

In my experience there are far too many people who are stupid, or who at least act stupidly. And the large majority of people who believe things don't really know why they believe it. They were raised that way, they were taught that way, so that's how it is. If they did stop to think about it, many would have to decide that they were misled their whole lives. Living in the South, I have seen an awful lot of so-called Christians who can't even understand the 4th grade level of a newspaper, much less the more challenging Bible which they so vehemently espouse.

When I said people aren't stupid, I mean that the human being is an intelligent species. I completely agree with you. Humans are intelligent but few choose to act on it...sort of the difference between knowledge and wisdom. Most people don't even care to figure out facts to be able to SHOW wisdom...like you said, "they were raised that way...so that's how it is."

That works for me! Keep religion out of the schools and the government and I'll be happy to keep science and government out of the churches.

Yes, I agree. There was a reason why the founder of this country thought that separation of church and state is a good idea, and I agree with them. Personally, I feel like if you are religious and are completely convinced you're right, why do you feel the need to parade your ideas everywhere? It just seems to me that the people who fight so hard to plaster ideas constantly must not be too convinced of those ideas themselves: otherwise why fight so hard to keep it in people's faces? Isn't that just the basic bandwagon technique? That isn't a good way to convince anyone of anything. It's just childish and annoying.

[IAN 2411]

This was the title of a program on BBC 2 today.

An age old discussion is of course that if God (Gods,Goddess) is all powerful and loving, why does he allow such things to happen?

Several in the program talked about these things being a test for your faith, or a way to improve your character because you need important choices in your life. (Apperently this would apply to survivors, whether to help each other or fight over food.)

Some said life was a gift however long or short, and we should be happy for what we get.

So, does things like the earhquake prove that there is no God and if not, why are these things allowed to happen?

Are the Gods (if they exist) really interested in us on a personal basis?

I have written a book about a fictitious warrior, who like I do, believes in the old Gods, Odin Zeus, Neptune etc, I hope to have it published sometime this year, and it is being edited as I write this post. The Gods were kept in the heavens by the mortals on earth to spiritually guide them through life, and as long as people believe in them they will still exist. Stop believing in a God and he will fade away, every God that you put before me I will tell you it is a myth, because that is what I have been taught and not what I believe. In my book the Gods I am talking about where put there to oversee the world in its infancy, when we really believed in trolls, fairies, imps, elves, witches and demons. They in turn were put there by a greater being, and shall we say as in my book the Creators, and it is these beings that invisibly patrol the universe.

I don’t think for one minute that the Haiti earthquake was a test of faith; it was a natural occurrence, and before we that are in this thread die, there will be many more. There will be more Tsunamis, Earth quakes and volcanic eruptions, they are meant to happen as the earth cools, and are in the pages of time if we could read them. If these Creators were real I am sure that they have seen the destruction and death, but their hands would be tied. If you go back in time and save a life, it is a fact that you will change the future dramatically, it is the same if the Creators save thousands of lives; that are in the pages of time to die at that precise time, once again the future is changed. The lives that are saved in hospitals or minor accidents and wars are meant to be saved, as you must remember that a lot more lives die on the operating table and in the same wars. Is there a god? The unanswered Question, but the truth of the question is, if you believe in a God then he/she exists.

Regards ian 2411

[Thorne]

If these Creators were real I am sure that they have seen the destruction and death, but their hands would be tied. If you go back in time and save a life, it is a fact that you will change the future dramatically, it is the same if the Creators save thousands of lives; that are in the pages of time to die at that precise time, once again the future is changed. The lives that are saved in hospitals or minor accidents and wars are meant to be saved, as you must remember that a lot more lives die on the operating table and in the same wars.

So, predestination. The future is fixed and there's nothing we can do to change it. In which case, you have no choice in whether you believe or not. Your path is programmed from the moment of creation.

Sorry, I "choose" not to believe this.

[Thorne]

if you believe in a God then he/she exists.

But only in your own mind.

[IAN 2411]

If these Creators were real I am sure that they have seen the destruction and death, but their hands would be tied. If you go back in time and save a life, it is a fact that you will change the future dramatically, it is the same if the Creators save thousands of lives; that are in the pages of time to die at that precise time, once again the future is changed. The lives that are saved in hospitals or minor accidents and wars are meant to be saved, as you must remember that a lot more lives die on the operating table and in the same wars.

So, predestination. The future is fixed and there's nothing we can do to change it. In which case, you have no choice in whether you believe or not. Your path is programmed from the moment of creation.

Sorry, I "choose" not to believe this.

It is your choice not to believe Thorn, that is what the free world is all about, freedom of choice, but don’t mock others that do believe. Neither should you mock the theory of the past being changed once it has been set, and yes I mean set. If you went back in time and saved all those lives that were being lost in WW Two, by killing Hitler before the war even started, then Both the UK and the USA would be in the same predicament as China with its population explosion and there would be no Israel. Once that war had been won our countries futures had been re-set, and this will keep taking place to the end of time, whether you choose to believe or not.

Is there a god? The unanswered Question, but the truth of the question is, if you believe in a God then he/she exists.

But only in your own mind.

If your wife was run over by a car while you were at work, [and I pray to God this never takes place]. Once you found out, you would be driving across town like a madman trying to get to the hospital, and in your mind you would be saying [God please let her be ok]. Thank you for stating the obvious.

[13'sbadkitty]

i am getting married in a few months and wanted a ceremony that had more than the requirements of New York State. i found an officiant who was raised a Jew, became a Zen Buddhist and is a Reverend. He and i were talking he said something i really liked which is maybe veering off the path alittle bit. He said what we call God really comes down to alphabet. The one thing i do teach my kids is that God is everywhere and in everyone if you look hard enough. i practice Native American spirituality. The only thing of that that i try to impress upon them is respect everything as part of Creator and Creation. Everything has something to show you if you look. As Ian said there will be many more deaths in many more ways till the end of time. My mother just died 12/24 after being sick for 5 years and suffering the entire time. As in Job, she was a devout Christian when she got sick. There were times when she said that she didn't know why God let her suffer so. As in Job, the only thing anyone could do was sit quietly and attend to her suffering. i went to the Tibetan book of the Dead for my guidance in how to help her. Did anything i or the Christians do help her? She had also gone to the Rabbi during her lucid times as she was from a Jewish background. Did he bring her comfort? i don't know. She suffered worse than anyone i have ever watched die and cried out for help 24/7. The morning she died she spoke to her aide (she hadn't been lucid for months) and told her she was ready to die, to rest in peace and she died shortly after. So my point is this, during her suffering it clearly looked like all the faith in the world did nothing at all for her. She had said she felt abandoned. In the last moments of her life ( a devout life) it was clear that her faith had sustained her and led her to the next plane. i do not believe in heaven or hell. i do believe in a spirit world that mirrors this except we are closer to the Creator. i do believe we have lessons to learn that help us to grow in the direction our spirit is to grow. Do i think that i have the right to tell you how to live? in my beliefs that is a very big no no. My point is only that suffering doesn't mean that God is allowing it as death is part of this world. We suffer through birth, we suffer through death. To me its the same, to you it is what ever it is. Suffering is as pleasure is. To me reflections of the same thing. Nobody ever walks into a tv or radio station saying there was no natural disasters today so this is proof that God is here. i think its beautiful that we think and wonder and discuss the God idea as part of being human. To me, its proof that somewhere within us is a spot that needs this to grow. If there is a God and God wanted us to know for sure, it seems like it would be easy enough. i think we are meant to wonder and discuss and argue about this. i know i went several different directions at once with this post, random girl strikes again.

[Thorne]

It is your choice not to believe Thorn, that is what the free world is all about, freedom of choice, but don’t mock others that do believe. Neither should you mock the theory of the past being changed once it has been set, and yes I mean set.

I was not mocking anyone, I don't think. At least not deliberately. But I do laugh at the predestination idea. I don't know what you mean by "the theory of the past being changed once it has been set", but I thought we were talking about the future. No, the past is done, fixed, immutable. The future is what we make it. Your post implied that the future, too was fixed, and that the gods cannot interfere because of that. That would mean, then, that our present is their past, and our path is fixed. I cannot see any evidence for that, however. While travel into the past is limited to history and archeology and such, we are all traveling into the future with every breath we take. And it's changed by every decision we make.

If your wife was run over by a car while you were at work, [and I pray to God this never takes place]. Once you found out, you would be driving across town like a madman trying to get to the hospital, and in your mind you would be saying [God please let her be ok]. Thank you for stating the obvious.

While not quite so drastic, perhaps, I was in a similar situation when my second son was born. We got to the hospital easily, they put her in a birthing room, or whatever the hell it was called then, and things seemed all right. Suddenly they were wheeling her down the corridor, nurses calling for a surgery, the doctor tearing off his jacket, asking where his people were, a nurse dragging me into a changing room to scrub and put on a surgical gown. I'll tell you, it was a terrifying few minutes, for sure. But I didn't call on some fictional deity for help. I called my mother. On the phone. Does that make her God?

People dream up all kinds of creations in their minds. Libraries are full of these creations. It's called fiction. Thinking about them doesn't make them real. Writing about them doesn't make them real. The gods of modern man are no more real than the gods of Valhalla, or Mount Olympus, or the great god Gurk who brought the mammoths each year.

[Thorne]

13'sbadkitty,
I'm very sorry to hear of your loss. And I'm glad that your faith has helped you to deal with that loss.

My own parents are still here, though my mother is not well. Thankfully she's not in any pain, but she has become more religious as she's grown older. It brings her comfort and I try to support her in it where I can. Like you, I won't try to force my beliefs, or lack of them, on anyone. I only ask that they provide me the same courtesy.

Again, my condolences.

[IAN 2411]

[QUOTE=Thorne;843604] While not quite so drastic, perhaps, I was in a similar situation when my second son was born. We got to the hospital easily, they put her in a birthing room, or whatever the hell it was called then, and things seemed all right. Suddenly they were wheeling her down the corridor, nurses calling for a surgery, the doctor tearing off his jacket, asking where his people were, a nurse dragging me into a changing room to scrub and put on a surgical gown. I'll tell you, it was a terrifying few minutes, for sure. But I didn't call on some fictional deity for help. I called my mother. On the phone. Does that make her God? QUOTE]

Are you trying to tell 48.207 members of this site and me Thorn, that since you were born you have never uttered any of these phrases? Good god, good lord, for god’s sake, god knows, god bless you, sorry but please excuse me for saying I don’t believe you.

Does that make her a god?

Was there really any need for that irrelivant question?

Regards ian 2411

[Thorne]

[QUOTE=ian 2411;843611]

Are you trying to tell 48.207 members of this site and me Thorn, that since you were born you have never uttered any of these phrases? Good god, good lord, for god’s sake, god knows, god bless you, sorry but please excuse me for saying I don’t believe you.

Of course not! That's not what I said at all. But what difference if I do say it? I've said things like that all my life. They're endemic to the American language. But just because I say, "God damn it!" doesn't mean I believe he will.

Your post stated that just believing in gods make them real, did it not?

if you believe in a God then he/she exists.

Now you seem to be saying that just speaking the word, God or Goddess, makes him or her real. But which god/goddess? Thor? Hera? Venus? Jehovah? There's four more I've spoken aloud. I'll expect Xmas cards from all of them.

So:

Was there really any need for that irrelivant question?

Perhaps my question wasn't irrelevant after all? If just believing it can make it true, then faith can, indeed, move mountains. And my mother can, indeed, be a goddess.