The reasons why we exist?

[Dorothy]

We learned the answer to this question of why we exist, which is “To know, love and serve God” from our Baltimore Catechism, as Catholic school students. And now in my Senior years, with time to reflect and with increased faith, I can fully understand and appreciate the meaning of “to know, love and serve God.” Wouldn’t the world be a better place if everyone held this belief?

Most certainly, YES!

 

[PRmerger]

That should be obvious: Because I am not the creator of the Universe. I didn’t give that little girl to her family just to snatch her cruelly away because I can.
My stabbing a five-year-old would be an act to continue the child’s life. The creator causing such pain to a child is an act that we would call many rather nasty things if it was anything but God. We would likely sentence a human like that to life imprisonment or death.

It is analogous.

You could try to explain to your 5 yr old why you are standing by while a team of big people shove sharp objects into her tiny little arms, and why you do nothing.

But she wouldn’t understand.

And in her eyes, you certainly could. You are, as it were, the creator of her universe.
Yet you do nothing.

Should she assume that you are a monster since you have permitted such atrocities to be done to her?

 

[tonyrey]

I have taken the opposite direction as I age. I don’t believe it is necessary. Mankind is naturally moral with the obvious exceptions.We managed to exist for many thousands of years prior to Christ and never brought about our own demise. We created laws and engineering marvels, civilizations, had children and so on.

The bloodstained history of humanity and the likelihood of a nuclear holocaust demolish your hypothesis.

 

[oldcelt]

The bloodstained history of humanity and the likelihood of a nuclear holocaust demolish your hypothesis.

The recovery from all those events and the forward progress of humanity demonstrates are potential for nobleness quite clearly. That we have stumbled, and will stumble again does not preclude our basic morality.

Even in the midst of terrible events caused by man, there have always been others performing acts of great kindness and courage.

 

[tonyrey]

The bloodstained history of humanity and the likelihood of a nuclear holocaust demolish your hypothesis.

The sceptic David Hume pointed out that “mixed phenomena” cannot prove an “unmixed” cause - in this case “our basic morality”. It is also inconsistent with the view that we originated from wild beasts without a conscience and dominated by the law of the jungle - and belied by the fact that one third of the world’s population are living in dire poverty.

 

[oldcelt]

The sceptic David Hume pointed out that “mixed phenomena” cannot prove an “unmixed” cause - in this case “our basic morality”. It is also inconsistent with the view that we originated from wild beasts without a conscience and dominated by the law of the jungle - and belied by the fact that one third of the world’s population are living in dire poverty.

I think you are misreading Hume’s intent. Basic morality is in no way incompatible with goods works during a crisis. Our evolution to the form we now hold has been long and messy

 

[tonyrey]

The sceptic David Hume pointed out that “mixed phenomena” cannot prove an “unmixed” cause - in this case “our basic morality”. It is also inconsistent with the view that we originated from wild beasts without a conscience and dominated by the law of the jungle - and belied by the fact that one third of the world’s population are living in dire poverty.

There is no evidence that “we” applies to the human race as a whole. It seems to be a case of wishful thinking - quite apart from the inability to explain how we can control ourselves and act purposefully if we are merely biological machines.

 

[Aloysium]

When I watch an eight-year-old suffer for months, choking, bleeding, screaming in pain for her mother, etc. No trade-off would make me think very highly of any god involved in that. No loving God would have any rational reason for such an action, and that is one of the primary reasons that I am a Deist.

That would be one of the primary reasons for my being Christian.
There is meaning in that suffering that reaches into the core of existence.
At the Centre is the Word made man, hung on the cross.
In those moments of agony, we are one with God.
Resurrected, He brings us to eternal joy in Him.

BTW: What comes across is that you are a Deist because you believe in a controlling God, untouched by our suffering.

 

[PRmerger]

That would be one of the primary reasons for my being Christian.
There is meaning in that suffering that reaches into the core of existence.
At the Centre is the Word made man, hung on the cross.
In those moments of agony, we are one with God.
Resurrected, He brings us to eternal joy in Him.

Indeed.

BTW: What comes across is that you are a Deist because you believe in a controlling God, untouched by our suffering.

Yes. And it is a peculiar conclusion. “I don’t like a God who would allow people to suffer, therefore I choose to believe that this God doesn’t exist.”

That’s about as reasonable as saying, "I couldn’t believe in a government that lies to its people, therefore I don’t believe this govt exists. "

What it sounds like is the epitome of creating a god after one’s own image, rather than conforming one’s reality to what is true.

If God exists, and even if this God is indeed the author of suffering for no good motive, the reasonable conclusion isn’t, “Therefore I am a deist”.

The reasonable conclusion is: God exists and He allows suffering for no good motive.

 

[nmgauss]

That would be one of the primary reasons for my being Christian.
There is meaning in that suffering that reaches into the core of existence.
At the Centre is the Word made man, hung on the cross.
In those moments of agony, we are one with God.
Resurrected, He brings us to eternal joy in Him.

BTW: What comes across is that you are a Deist because you believe in a controlling God, untouched by our suffering.

A deist believes that God does not control anything once it has been created.
“Deism holds that God does not intervene with the functioning of the natural world in any way, allowing it to run according to the laws of nature. For Deists, human beings can only know God via reason and the observation of nature, but not by revelation or supernatural manifestations (such as miracles) – phenomena which Deists regard with caution if not skepticism”

 

[PRmerger]

A deist believes that God does not control anything once it has been created.
“Deism holds that God does not intervene with the functioning of the natural world in any way, allowing it to run according to the laws of nature. For Deists, human beings can only know God via reason and the observation of nature, but not by revelation or supernatural manifestations (such as miracles) – phenomena which Deists regard with caution if not skepticism”

It is not a reasonable conclusion to say, “I don’t like that God would allow people to suffer, therefore God does not control anything once it has been created.”

The conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise.

 

[nmgauss]

It is not a reasonable conclusion to say, “I don’t like that God would allow people to suffer, therefore God does not control anything once it has been created.”

The conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise.

If a person suffers because of lack of water, can God provide water to that person permanently without the person making any effort to get water for him/her self?
If a person suffers because of lack of food, can God provide food to the person permanently without that person making any effort to get food for him/her self?
If a person suffers because the temperature is either too low or too high, does God change it so that person has no need to seek warmth or coolness?
If a person has no brain, and therefore cannot pray, is there any hope? Can a person with anencephaly need to pray to Jesus in order to be clean from original sin?
If a person has too many of chromosome 21 (trisomy 21, is a genetic disorder called Down’s Syndrome caused by the presence of all or part of a third copy of chromosome 21.) is there any hope for a cure?

 

[oldcelt]

That would be one of the primary reasons for my being Christian.
There is meaning in that suffering that reaches into the core of existence.
At the Centre is the Word made man, hung on the cross.
In those moments of agony, we are one with God.
Resurrected, He brings us to eternal joy in Him.

BTW: What comes across is that you are a Deist because you believe in a controlling God, untouched by our suffering.

There is only a meaning if you wish to assign one; otherwise, it is the senseless and horrid death of a child one of the results of our life here on earth. Nobody decreed it, nobody planned it, nobody foresaw it, nobody benefits from it…It just happens.

What should come across is that I have a great deal of respect for the notion of a loving God. The guy out there may be weeping at these deaths wishing he could do something about it. At least I hope so. Of course, He may not even be aware that we exist.

 

[oldcelt]

It is not a reasonable conclusion to say, “I don’t like that God would allow people to suffer, therefore God does not control anything once it has been created.”

The conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise.

As I have said before, it is more complicated than that. I studied the documents of Christianity heavily during a roughly 15 year period and I found that things didn’t seem to add up. As I was studying I combined my true love, History, and it made even less sense. It is impossible to give a concise thesis in this arena, but I have started on a book that may lay out my thoughts in a more intelligible pattern…Not answering random points thrown in at random times.

I find it incomprehensible that people open admit that their God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent and then try to explain why their God permits the level of suffering that exists in this world. If that God exists, it is unreasonable for someone to worship them.

 

[PRmerger]

If a person suffers because of lack of water, can God provide water to that person permanently without the person making any effort to get water for him/her self?
If a person suffers because of lack of food, can God provide food to the person permanently without that person making any effort to get food for him/her self?

Sure.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/...WOnLuvLg-119UKvrsDZYvwFHDiG0wNa9jHHQzkpC66oxX

If a person suffers because the temperature is either too low or too high, does God change it so that person has no need to seek warmth or coolness?

I’m pretty sure that has happened before.

If a person has no brain, and therefore cannot pray, is there any hope? Can a person with anencephaly need to pray to Jesus in order to be clean from original sin?

That’s what baptism is for.

If a person has too many of chromosome 21 (trisomy 21, is a genetic disorder called Down’s Syndrome caused by the presence of all or part of a third copy of chromosome 21.) is there any hope for a cure?

Why would we need to cure that? I think they are just perfect the way they are!

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...wpQ-v9iU6PCCHWnCzxyb33ne4jmlw354ZqLtHdMQBLuvu

BTW: there is a young man with Down Syndrome at my parish. Every time he receives Him in the Eucharist it chokes me up. Chokes me up. His reverence and awe at what he is doing puts me to shame. He gets it, totally.

So why would we want a cure for that?

 

[hope19]

Do you agree that truth, goodness, freedom, justice, beauty and love are more precious and significant than anything else in life?

Yes, I agree because it is what that makes us happier on Earth.

 

[PRmerger]

I find it incomprehensible that people open admit that their God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent and then try to explain why their God permits the level of suffering that exists in this world. If that God exists, it is unreasonable for someone to worship them.

Now, that is a different animal. I think you are correct to conclude that if God exists and permits suffering for no reason, then it would be unreasonable to worship Him.

However, what you have stated is that you don’t believe in a God who permits suffering because you don’t like the idea of a God who would do this.

That’s incoherent and is simply designing a god that conforms to your own wishes.

Now, as to the part about God permitting suffering for no reason, that’s also incoherent.

As I have demonstrated, to your 5 yr old you may be permitting suffering for no reason, while she is being attacked by hospital personnel. You may even (if you are a good father) have held her down and assisted the hospital personnel–to her utter and complete horror.

Yet you know that you are permitting her suffering for a good reason. A very good reason.

So perhaps you could extrapolate that to God.

 

[oldcelt]

Now, that is a different animal. I think you are correct to conclude that if God exists and permits suffering for no reason, then it would be unreasonable to worship Him.

However, what you have stated is that you don’t believe in a God who permits suffering because you don’t like the idea of a God who would do this.

That’s incoherent and is simply designing a god that conforms to your own wishes.

Now, as to the part about God permitting suffering for no reason, that’s also incoherent.

As I have demonstrated, to your 5 yr old you may be permitting suffering for no reason, while she is being attacked by hospital personnel. You may even (if you are a good father) have held her down and assisted the hospital personnel–to her utter and complete horror.

Yet you know that you are permitting her suffering for a good reason. A very good reason.

So perhaps you could extrapolate that to God.

First, I think you misinterpreted an earlier version of the same statement or I mis-wrote. What I did say is that the existence of such suffering as I had mentioned showed to me that the God I had been taught in my youth simply did not exist. Even if I had solid proof that a god like that existed, I would not worship Him, regardless of the consequences.

My quite rational conclusion was that if the all-loving god existed, he could not be involved in affairs here on earth. Deism.

Regarding your analogy, you must surely see the difference of suffering from an invisible source and to the death to be quite different than your Daddy holding you down for a few minutes.

 

[tonyrey]

Do you agree that truth, goodness, freedom, justice, beauty and love are more precious and significant than anything else in life?

And in Heaven!

 

[tonyrey]

There is only a meaning if you wish to assign one; otherwise, it is the senseless and horrid death of a child one of the results of our life here on earth. Nobody decreed it, nobody planned it, nobody foresaw it, nobody benefits from it…It just happens.

You need to explain how **all **tragedies could be prevented.

What should come across is that I have a great deal of respect for the notion of a loving God. The guy out there may be weeping at these deaths wishing he could do something about it. At least I hope so. Of course, He may not even be aware that we exist.

We have no idea to what extent God prevents and mitigates tragedies. It is all a matter of guesswork considering that we are utterly incapable of designing a universe…