How do I answer this argument?

[Needtostop]

So why then is it ok for your loving god to watch coldly and do nothing as children are abused and murdered? Doing nothing is either wrong oro its not. Or is it ik to watch sometimes?
Your argument appears to be that humans work to a far higher moral standard than god as its wrong for us to do it but its ok for god. He can kill whome he wants and refuse to help stop the murder of innicents

 

[CountrySteve]

you do realize God aint responsible for the evil man does right? God gave us free will so its our fault and satans fault for the wrong in the world

 

[revert_jen]

I’m sure other people will come up with better answers, but here is mine: free will is extremely important.

If we do not have free will, which includes the ability to choose evil, we are not human. We are just puppets. If people cannot perform evil acts, it is meaningless if they perform good acts.

As for watching “coldly,” He loves each child more than any person does. If it wouldn’t invalidate the meaning of humanity, I’m sure He would love to interfere with causality to save even one of them from unnecessary pain. What He did instead was become Man and come to Earth and allow us to exercise our free will in an equally unrestricted way on Himself. We tortured, insulted, and killed him. He didn’t step in to stop that, either, because it was vitally important.

We are “inside the picture” so our actions are part of causality and are part of the natural use of free will.

Here is a bad analogy, but maybe it will help a little. Say a bunch of schoolchildren are putting on a play. The play would be better if their parents came in and put it on for them, but then the main point of the play would be lost. If God came in and fixed everything we broke, the point of people existing would be lost.

Also, saying in effect, “God doesn’t have to work to save innocents from suffering; why do we?” sounds a little like, “Daddy doesn’t have to eat his broccoli, why do I?” Yes, we are held to different standards than God–of course we are! God isn’t held to a standard, he is the standard. He is the one responsible for the fact that there are any living people at all. He also is the only one capable of gving any child (or any adult for that matter) true fulfillment in Heaven.

–Jen

 

[Needtostop]

I’m sure other people will come up with better answers, but here is mine: free will is extremely important.

If we do not have free will, which includes the ability to choose evil, we are not human. We are just puppets. If people cannot perform evil acts, it is meaningless if they perform good acts.

As for watching “coldly,” He loves each child more than any person does. If it wouldn’t invalidate the meaning of humanity, I’m sure He would love to interfere with causality to save even one of them from unnecessary pain. What He did instead was become Man and come to Earth and allow us to exercise our free will in an equally unrestricted way on Himself. We tortured, insulted, and killed him. He didn’t step in to stop that, either, because it was vitally important.

We are “inside the picture” so our actions are part of causality and are part of the natural use of free will.

Here is a bad analogy, but maybe it will help a little. Say a bunch of schoolchildren are putting on a play. The play would be better if their parents came in and put it on for them, but then the main point of the play would be lost. If God came in and fixed everything we broke, the point of people existing would be lost.

Also, saying in effect, “God doesn’t have to work to save innocents from suffering; why do we?” sounds a little like, “Daddy doesn’t have to eat his broccoli, why do I?” Yes, we are held to different standards than God–of course we are! God isn’t held to a standard, he is the standard. He is the one responsible for the fact that there are any living people at all. He also is the only one capable of gving any child (or any adult for that matter) true fulfillment in Heaven.

–Jen

Thank you this is a good answer. I’ll tell him that.

 

[Needtostop]

I’m sure other people will come up with better answers, but here is mine: free will is extremely important.

If we do not have free will, which includes the ability to choose evil, we are not human. We are just puppets. If people cannot perform evil acts, it is meaningless if they perform good acts.

As for watching “coldly,” He loves each child more than any person does. If it wouldn’t invalidate the meaning of humanity, I’m sure He would love to interfere with causality to save even one of them from unnecessary pain. What He did instead was become Man and come to Earth and allow us to exercise our free will in an equally unrestricted way on Himself. We tortured, insulted, and killed him. He didn’t step in to stop that, either, because it was vitally important.

We are “inside the picture” so our actions are part of causality and are part of the natural use of free will.

Here is a bad analogy, but maybe it will help a little. Say a bunch of schoolchildren are putting on a play. The play would be better if their parents came in and put it on for them, but then the main point of the play would be lost. If God came in and fixed everything we broke, the point of people existing would be lost.

Also, saying in effect, “God doesn’t have to work to save innocents from suffering; why do we?” sounds a little like, “Daddy doesn’t have to eat his broccoli, why do I?” Yes, we are held to different standards than God–of course we are! God isn’t held to a standard, he is the standard. He is the one responsible for the fact that there are any living people at all. He also is the only one capable of gving any child (or any adult for that matter) true fulfillment in Heaven.

–Jen

OK, I told him that, and this is his response:
“if he’s the standard its a poor one and humans regularly achieve a higher standard.Few humans would watch a child being beaten to death and do nothing.
Posting this way stops negative comments appearing on your video and is a form of false witness to events.
Its a poor analogy asit equates moral horrors to a childs play and eating broccoli.
I not saying “Daddy doesn’t have to eat his broccoli, why do I?”
I’m saying your god if he exists (no evidence for that) is a cold capricious malevolence who is worthy of contempt for failing to live up to the superior moral code followed by most humans. As such he is worthy of contempt and disgust - not worship. I would be disgusted and contemptuous of a human who watched a child being beaten to death and did nothing as it is cowardice.
You are seriously saying that you are showing love, by watching someone you love being beaten to death whilst doing NOTHING.
You have a very strange definition of love and no definition I want any part of”

How do I respond?

 

[Arizona_Mike]

OK, I told him that, and this is his response:
“if he’s the standard its a poor one and humans regularly achieve a higher standard.Few humans would watch a child being beaten to death and do nothing.
Posting this way stops negative comments appearing on your video and is a form of false witness to events.
Its a poor analogy asit equates moral horrors to a childs play and eating broccoli.
I not saying “Daddy doesn’t have to eat his broccoli, why do I?”
I’m saying your god if he exists (no evidence for that) is a cold capricious malevolence who is worthy of contempt for failing to live up to the superior moral code followed by most humans. As such he is worthy of contempt and disgust - not worship. I would be disgusted and contemptuous of a human who watched a child being beaten to death and did nothing as it is cowardice.
You are seriously saying that you are showing love, by watching someone you love being beaten to death whilst doing NOTHING.
You have a very strange definition of love and no definition I want any part of”

How do I respond?

The right to free will includes the right to do evil. Would your interlocutor willingly give up the chance to make his own decisions to ensure that no one comes to harm? If so, he would be merely an organic robot, or in Anthony Burgess’s phrase, a Clockwork Orange, incapable both of good and evil because the choice has been taken from him.

As he asserts that “Few humans would watch a child being beaten to death and do nothing,” you may reasonably ask if he stands by while children are daily murdered and ripped from their mother’s wombs in abortion clinics, or if your friend attempts to stop it. Is he the paragon of moral virtue that he claims to be? If he talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk, he can be presumed to be wrong in his other moral arguments.

God guarantees justice to the sinner and eternal happiness to the victim, given the infinite life God affords us. If your friend denies the possibility of such an infinite perspective, he is invalidating the terms of the argument.

What alternative schema does your atheist friend offer? Life’s a ***** and then you die?

 

[Abba]

Hello Needtostop and a belated welcome to CAF to you.

If someone is not open to recognizing truth and is closed to it, I think it will be difficult. There are times when people respond and act based on convictions they have arrived at due to various possible reasons (disappointment, hatred, insecurity, pride, revenge, considers that the Church condemns their actions or way of life, and amongst other; pure ignorance, etc… ) about many topics including religious and political. Considering that you are being challenged by someone and are unable to defend your faith, I would suggest that you ask that person to respect your beliefs and in the meanwhile try to educate yourself regarding the teachings of the Church.

In 1 Peter 3:15 we read:

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.

Learn to defend your faith and pray for those who persecute and attack you and challenge you for it.

I forget right now who it was that said something like that those who leave the Church do not know what they are leaving. Many people that leave the Church lack catechism and do not really know what they have left.

---

Needtostop,

Often times, when I read prayers or actually pray certain prayers that mention or insinuate that the reason for love of God is the resurrection and the compensation of heaven etc. I find myself not totally agreeing. Then there is Saint Paul who wrote:

1 Corinthians 15:14
“And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.”

I love Paul, don’t get me wrong, and I have the outmost respect for him; but on this little point I do not totally agree with him. It could be that he was making a specific point, such as to confirm the validity of Christ resurrection etc…

Needtostop, the reason I have a little problem with the prayers and Paul’s comment is that deep in my heart and soul I think it is sufficient to love God because He loved us so much that: "“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

I love Him because He loves us so much with absolute and infinite love, with a love so powerful and strong and intense that the tiniest drop of it would be our little human heart explode. We are incapable of loving as much as God loves. Imagine that!

God did not create us to be His puppets. He created us in His image and He respects us and loves us. He gave us and the angels free will and because of that we have evil in the world. God endures the evil out of love for us. He respects our free will and we should trust Him. He has a plan of salvation and we just need to trust in Him and stay close to the Catholic Church, which is the Church Our Lord Jesus established.

Yes, you will read a lot of attacks against the faith in the internet. Recently, I have been personally attacked from a professional person who lives a life style that is considered inappropriate by the Church; I have not even said anything; but just the fact that I am Catholic makes me in his eyes as someone who is condemning him. It’s not easy, the Church is under attack and so this is a good time to learn to defend your faith and pray for those who challenge and attack you because of your faith.

This is why I love Our Lord Jesus Christ, even if when I die everything comes to an end, I would not regret having loved Our Lord:

 

[spencelo]

I’m sure other people will come up with better answers, but here is mine: free will is extremely important.

If we do not have free will, which includes the ability to choose evil, we are not human. We are just puppets. If people cannot perform evil acts, it is meaningless if they perform good acts.
–Jen

I don’t see how God intervening to alleviate suffering at certain times violates our free will (think natural disasters), or if it does, why that violation isn’t worth the intervention. If I intervene to stop a rape, did I violate the free will of the rapist? Yes, because I prevented him - using force - from doing what he freely chose to do. Now, if God intervened instead of me, why would God’s violation of the rapist’s free will be such a bad thing?

 

[Needtostop]

I don’t see how God intervening to alleviate suffering at certain times violates our free will (think natural disasters), or if it does, why that violation isn’t worth the intervention. If I intervene to stop a rape, did I violate the free will of the rapist? Yes, because I prevented him - using force - from doing what he freely chose to do. Now, if God intervened instead of me, why would God’s violation of the rapist’s free will be such a bad thing?

This isn’t just about free will. God lets bad things happen so a greater good can come from them.

 

[spencelo]

This isn’t just about free will. God lets bad things happen so a greater good can come from them.

So God allowed the Holocaust so that “a greater good” could occur? What “greater good” could possibly justify permitting the Holocaust?

 

[Abba]

I don’t see how God intervening to alleviate suffering at certain times violates our free will (think natural disasters), or if it does, why that violation isn’t worth the intervention. If I intervene to stop a rape, did I violate the free will of the rapist? Yes, because I prevented him - using force - from doing what he freely chose to do. Now, if God intervened instead of me, why would God’s violation of the rapist’s free will be such a bad thing?

Good question.

Actually, God does intervene and He does so in such a way that it does not violate our free will. Our Lord Jesus said:

Mathew 7:
Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

He hears our prayers. If God did not intervene: why pray?

Notice that YOU used the word GOD. By using such a word, I think that, you mean the creator of heaven and earth and of all that is seen and unseen. This means that you are not questioning and judging another human being. You need to take under consideration that He is all knowing and in His wisdom (He is Wisdom itself) and with all the knowledge that He has of all that will happen in time and the plan of salvation that He has for us; He makes the correct decisions to intervene or not and when and why. How He decides? I can only tell you that He does intervene for example for souls who have faith etc… but He also tries them and often makes them carry a heavy cross - for a purgation.

I think, instead of judging God it is more sensible to trust Him. We cannot understand everything nor know everything, but God does and He makes the decisions that He makes out of pure and absolute wisdom. Knowing that He loves us immensely each and every one of us; I think the best we can do is trust Him and do our part.

We did not tell God that we wanted to be born, He chose for us. Life it’s not bad and I am glad He gave me life. I trust that He knows best. I choose to trust Him freely because I know that He is Love and Mercy and Wisdom itself. I am glad He gave me life and I do not know exactly what awaits me after this life, but I try to follow His ways because I trust Him.

Note that we do not know the impact, for perhaps centuries, that the prevention of a particular event or act may have, but God knows.

 

[fakename]

Thank you this is a good answer. I’ll tell him that.

Isn’t the answer that God created everyone so he can allow or cause their deaths no matter how bad the dying is?

I’m pretty sure that satisfies that question.

 

[Abba]

Isn’t the answer that God created everyone so he can allow or cause their deaths no matter how bad the dying is?

I’m pretty sure that satisfies that question.

What? Do you really think that is the reason God created us? So, He can cause our deaths no matter how horrible?

 

[greylorn]

So why then is it ok for your loving god to watch coldly and do nothing as children are abused and murdered? Doing nothing is either wrong oro its not. Or is it ik to watch sometimes?
Your argument appears to be that humans work to a far higher moral standard than god as its wrong for us to do it but its ok for god. He can kill whome he wants and refuse to help stop the murder of innicents

You are simply observing the falsehood of the “loving God” belief. It is simply one of many opinions about the nature and properties of the Creator which men have invented because it feels good and sells pew seats.

BTW why not pay a little more attention to the CAF’s automatic spell checker which highlights non-words like oro, ik, whome, etc? Doing so will help you appear to be smarter.

 

[fred_conty]

OK, I told him that, and this is his response:
“if he’s the standard its a poor one and humans regularly achieve a higher standard.Few humans would watch a child being beaten to death and do nothing.
Posting this way stops negative comments appearing on your video and is a form of false witness to events.
Its a poor analogy asit equates moral horrors to a childs play and eating broccoli.
I not saying “Daddy doesn’t have to eat his broccoli, why do I?”
I’m saying your god if he exists (no evidence for that) is a cold capricious malevolence who is worthy of contempt for failing to live up to the superior moral code followed by most humans. As such he is worthy of contempt and disgust - not worship. I would be disgusted and contemptuous of a human who watched a child being beaten to death and did nothing as it is cowardice.
You are seriously saying that you are showing love, by watching someone you love being beaten to death whilst doing NOTHING.
You have a very strange definition of love and no definition I want any part of”

How do I respond?

It sounds like this person has a grudge against God. This happens when something happened to them that they didn’t feel like they deserved. So they want to get back at God. I know of a mother who lost her infant and it took 25 years to resolve her bitterness toward God. And she was a very christian woman but resentful. And another mother who lost her 16 year old also would not go to church for many years after.

People many times are hurt deeply and look for the cause. God becomes the villian and they get out their soapbox. Reading between the lines, it sounds as tho there is no satisfactory answer that this person will accept for the moment. I believe the best possible explaination would be to be kind with him and just say,“well someday I’m sure you will understand.”

Just a thought.

 

[Spirithound]

OK, I told him that, and this is his response:
“if he’s the standard its a poor one and humans regularly achieve a higher standard.Few humans would watch a child being beaten to death and do nothing.
Posting this way stops negative comments appearing on your video and is a form of false witness to events.
Its a poor analogy asit equates moral horrors to a childs play and eating broccoli.
I not saying “Daddy doesn’t have to eat his broccoli, why do I?”
I’m saying your god if he exists (no evidence for that) is a cold capricious malevolence who is worthy of contempt for failing to live up to the superior moral code followed by most humans. As such he is worthy of contempt and disgust - not worship. I would be disgusted and contemptuous of a human who watched a child being beaten to death and did nothing as it is cowardice.
You are seriously saying that you are showing love, by watching someone you love being beaten to death whilst doing NOTHING.
You have a very strange definition of love and no definition I want any part of”

How do I respond?

The problem with these questions is that they are so short-sighted. Your friend asks why children get beaten to death. OK, let’s say God grants that no one under the age of 15 will be beaten to death ever again. Then your friend asks why teenagers get beaten to death. God grants that. Then it’s adults. Then God eliminates rape, murder, and stealing. Finally, your friend asks why avalanches happen, and you ask him, would you like to get rid of water in solid form, mountains, or gravity?

The entire problem of Earth is that it is not Heaven. God made us with free will so that we could get to Heaven (Free will comes as a necessary part of the spirit that can access Heaven). God does not follow the moral code that we must because He is completely Other to us. But He loves us so much that He became one of us and died for us to take us to Heaven.

Without our eyes on the Cross, suffering makes no sense at all. Numerous saints have written about suffering. Try St. Catherine of Siena, “The Dialogue”. You’ll find the beginning of her treatment of the problem of pain before you reach the 6th chapter.

 

[chadt1212]

I don’t see how God intervening to alleviate suffering at certain times violates our free will (think natural disasters), or if it does, why that violation isn’t worth the intervention. If I intervene to stop a rape, did I violate the free will of the rapist? Yes, because I prevented him - using force - from doing what he freely chose to do. Now, if God intervened instead of me, why would God’s violation of the rapist’s free will be such a bad thing?

Don’t assume to know how God does intervene. Just because He doesn’t pop down in a costume like you may want, doesn’t mean he doesn’t intervene. I often see the best of mankind brought out by the worst, perhaps as a result of those who respond to Gods grace?

As to your specific example, apply that logic to yourself - you would not be an atheist. Isn’t that somewhat ironic? I suppose you cant have your cake and eat it too…

 

[chadt1212]

So why then is it ok for your loving god to watch coldly and do nothing as children are abused and murdered? Doing nothing is either wrong oro its not. Or is it ik to watch sometimes?
Your argument appears to be that humans work to a far higher moral standard than god as its wrong for us to do it but its ok for god. He can kill whome he wants and refuse to help stop the murder of innicents

I would really recommend the book by Peter Kreeft titled “Making Sense out of Suffering” or listening to his free online lectures covering The Problem of Pain by C.S. Lewis (may also like this book):

peterkreeft.com/audio.htm/audio_more.htm

 

[DCNBILL]

So God allowed the Holocaust so that “a greater good” could occur? What “greater good” could possibly justify permitting the Holocaust?

Numerous souls living for eternity in heaven, and giving the world a lesson in what not to do?

 

[ccmnxc]

First point out that more often than not, God stops many bad things from happening to us. He probably doesn’t take into account that things would be worse if God allowed them to be. Second, if life was perfect, there would be no need for Heaven. There would be no need for a Redeemer. We’d have everything we need right here. That is obviously not the case. Again, it really comes down to free will, as has been stated. Ask the atheist you are talking to if he would like to be a puppet without the ability to do anything wrong. The answer is obvioously no, because he does indeed sin and therefore probably wouldn’t want to give up that power he has over himself. Also, from an atheist’s perspective, being beaten to death is one of the worst things possible because they don’t believe in an afterlife. We do however. If the atheist you are talking to had his way, they child would have to receive perhaps painful, difficult, and expensive medical treatment. After being released from the hospital, he would still go through more pain in his life. If he died from a beating, that would be the end of his suffering forever. He would now live in paradise with God. You can ask the atheist why he would condemn the child to a life of more pain than allow to experience paradise. He fears death because that is the end. If God exists, however, there is no need to fear death as long as you have faith in Him. If this child didn’t, based on what this person is saying, they are rather young. God would perhaps blame the parents, but I doubt He would blame the child for not knowing Him. The Child would not be willfully ignorant of Him.
As far as natural disaster, that is how the universe works. If there weren’t hurricanes, there would also be no rain, snow, sleet, hail, etc. If you took out that component of weather, you’d mess everything else up. Also, earthquakes happen through plate movement. How different and perhaps uninhabitable would our world be without plate tectonics. Anyways, fewer people would die in these disasters if:
A: more people were willing to reach out.
B: money would be invested in prediction and protection instead of wasted on other, less important things.
Also, they allow us to help others. It is hard to do good if there is nothing bad to begin with. Death will inevitably happen. It is just that we don’t think of it as the end of the road. His view of death and your are probably pretty different. If you are going along the lines of “If God exists,” your viewpoint should be taken into account.
Hope this helped. ccmnxc