Why did God create a world were babies are killed?

[catharina]

You have given no answer other than I have faith. Which is just another way of saying that you don’t know, but you accept that God loves all children. That is no real answer. You should be able to answer these questions:

And what the other babies that didn’t have anyone? What about the babies so messed up they cannot perceive anything but pain? What about a baby born near a just exploded volcano that only experiences chocking to death on ash?

with something better than I don’t know know how God showed them love but I have faith that he did. It seems that you are using faith as a way of avoiding a difficult issue.

Richard - only you are saying that I don’t know. I haven’t said that.

I do know - through faith. What does my faith also tell me? It tells me to unite my personal suffering to the will of God, to the intentions of the Church, thereby lessening the load of suffering for others in the world. That sounds mystifying to you? It is of a mystical nature.

You can neither grasp that nor appreciate it?

Then the lack is in you - because my faith assures me that it’s so.

 

[Richard_Powers]

Richard - only you are saying that I don’t know. I haven’t said that.

I do know - through faith. What does my faith also tell me? It tells me to unite my personal suffering to the will of God, to the intentions of the Church, thereby lessening the load of suffering for others in the world. That sounds mystifying to you? It is of a mystical nature.

You can neither grasp that nor appreciate it?

Then the lack is in you - because my faith assures me that it’s so.

If you know then answer these questions:

And what the other babies that didn’t have anyone? What about the babies so messed up they cannot perceive anything but pain? What about a baby born near a just exploded volcano that only experiences chocking to death on ash?

Tell me how God (not just that he did) showed love to these babies?

 

[VociMike]

If you know then answer these questions:

And what the other babies that didn’t have anyone? What about the babies so messed up they cannot perceive anything but pain? What about a baby born near a just exploded volcano that only experiences chocking to death on ash?

Tell me how God (not just that he did) showed love to these babies?

What we as Catholics know, without question, is that God granted that baby enough grace that the baby could choose to be with him, without any pain, suffering or troubles, for all eternity. What we also know is that God became man, suffered and died, to open the way to heaven for that baby.

But you still haven’t told us what you would do differently.

 

[Richard_Powers]

What we as Catholics know, without question, is that God granted that baby enough grace that the baby could choose to be with him, without any pain, suffering or troubles, for all eternity.

But you still haven’t told us what you would do differently.

Who said I would? But I couldn’t then turn around and pretend I loved the baby that suffered and died in the situation I created.

And how you know the assertion that God granted the baby enough grace to choose to be with him is true? What is the evidence for this assertion? It seems like the whole God loves all humans in just an unfalsifiable assertion.

 

[catharina]

If you know then answer these questions:

And what the other babies that didn’t have anyone? What about the babies so messed up they cannot perceive anything but pain? What about a baby born near a just exploded volcano that only experiences chocking to death on ash?

Tell me how God (not just that he did) showed love to these babies?

Richard, your contrarianism and obstinacy is almost laughable. Not only can I not prove that to you. I can’t prove it to me either since the data is unobtainable (name the baby, situation, ancestry, homeland, date of birth, gender, parents, occasion of catasrophe, etc., etc.) and I have no need to “prove it” to me or you because I KNOW it as a result of the gift of faith and that’s how I live my life.

OTOH, you seem to be living your life proposing a series of circular and quite random questions that no one need ever answer for you since in His very essence, God needs no defense.

 

[Richard_Powers]

Richard, your contrarianism and obstinacy is almost laughable. Not only can I not prove that to you. I can’t prove it to me either since the data is unobtainable (name the baby, situation, ancestry, homeland, date of birth, gender, parents, occasion of catasrophe, etc., etc.) and I have no need to “prove it” to me or you because I KNOW it as a result of the gift of faith and that’s how I live my life.

OTOH, you seem to be living your life proposing a series of circular and quite random questions that no one need ever answer for you since in His very essence, God needs no defense.

Whatever. I don’t know why you even responded to my post. You have no interest in actually examining these issues. You just cry “faith” at any tough issue instead of actually exploring the issue.

 

[VociMike]

Who said I would? But I couldn’t then turn around and pretend I loved the baby that suffered and died in the situation I created.

If you say that what God does shows he doesn’t love the baby, then you must demonstrate an alternative world in which God does love every baby according to your standards, so that we may compare and contrast the two. Without presenting an alternative your objections are meaningless, and your motives begin to be suspect.

And how you know the assertion that God granted the baby enough grace to choose to be with him is true? What is the evidence for this assertion? It seems like the whole God loves all humans in just an unfalsifiable assertion.

I said earlier that neither of us can “prove” our faith to the other. I can’t prove that Catholicism is true, and you can’t prove that Catholicism is false. So does that mean the discussion is over (you say “prove it” to us, and we reply “prove it” to you, ad nauseum), or did you want to move on to something else?

 

[VociMike]

Whatever. I don’t know why you even responded to my post. You have no interest in actually examining these issues. You just cry “faith” at any tough issue instead of actually exploring the issue.

Neither will you explore the issue. You will not provide an alternative world that would demonstrate God’s love in a way you claim this world does not.

 

[Richard_Powers]

If you say that what God does shows he doesn’t love the baby, then you must demonstrate an alternative world in which God does love every baby according to your standards, so that we may compare and contrast the two. Without presenting an alternative your objections are meaningless, and your motives begin to be suspect.

I don’t see the point of creating an alternative world and I do not think it is even possible for me to do so because there are just too many variables. And even if this is the best possible world it does not mean God loves every human. Maybe God had to create a world in which the destiny for some is just to suffer and die without understanding or the chance to get beyond the suffering, but how is God loving these sufferers? Just explain to how God loved all the babies and suffered died.

I said earlier that neither of us can “prove” our faith to the other. I can’t prove that Catholicism is true, and you can’t prove that Catholicism is false. So does that mean the discussion is over (you say “prove it” to us, and we reply “prove it” to you, ad nauseum), or did you want to move on to something else?

I think when we know that babies and died after lives of suffering that the onus in the person claiming that the entity that created this situation really loved the baby that suffered and died. I am not asking you to back up everything in Catholicism just to demonstrate that this baby was loved by God. I never asked you prove it. I asked for some evidence. All that we can see of the baby’s life was that it was born into a situation (created by God if he exists) where it would suffer and die without understanding or a chance to get beyond the suffering. Where is the evidence of love?

 

[Richard_Powers]

Neither will you explore the issue. You will not provide an alternative world that would demonstrate God’s love in a way you claim this world does not.

This may be the best possible world. It may not be possible to create a world with less suffering without doing even more harm to others. Let’s say that is all true. But then the babies are just a means to a better end. There is not love for them. The love for them is overruled for the greater good.

 

[VociMike]

I don’t see the point of creating an alternative world and I do not think it is even possible for me to do so because there are just too many variables. And even if this is the best possible world it does not mean God loves every human. Maybe God had to create a world in which the destiny for some is just to suffer and die without understanding or the chance to get beyond the suffering, but how is God loving these sufferers? Just explain to how God loved all the babies and suffered died.

OK, we have established that it is not obvious that a God who loved every single human person could have made a “better” world. That’s a start.

I think when we know that babies and died after lives of suffering that the onus in the person claiming that the entity that created this situation really loved the baby that suffered and died. I am not asking you to back up everything in Catholicism just to demonstrate that this baby was loved by God. I never asked you prove it. I asked for some evidence. All that we can see of the baby’s life was that it was born into a situation (created by God if he exists) where it would suffer and die without understanding or a chance to get beyond the suffering. Where is the evidence of love?

Alright, let’s try another approach. What would such evidence that this baby was loved by God look like to a non-believer such as yourself?

 

[Al_Masetti]

What is necessary is to consider the nature of God.

Many people kind of regard God as being a lot like us, except that God is “bigger” and smarter.

But as we have been taught: “God’s ways are not our ways”.

Isaiah 55:6-11. Seek the Lord while He may be found, call upon Him while He is near; let the wicked forsake their way, and the unrighteous their thoughts; let them return to the Lord, that He may have mercy on them, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon. For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, says the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.”

God is the Creator. Man is “merely” a creation, one of many different kinds of creations, but a creation nonetheless.

Man has free will and Man will be judged.

Remember the parable of the weeds among the wheat? The farmer would not destroy the weeds until AFTER the harvest. Earthly farmers don’t work that way, but God is going to defer destroying the “weeds” until after they have done their evil deeds.

Matthew 13:24-30

24 He put before them another parable: ‘The kingdom of heaven may be compared to someone who sowed good seed in his field; 25but while everybody was asleep, an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and then went away. 26So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared as well. 27And the slaves of the householder came and said to him, “Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where, then, did these weeds come from?” 28He answered, “An enemy has done this.” The slaves said to him, “Then do you want us to go and gather them?” 29But he replied, “No; for in gathering the weeds you would uproot the wheat along with them. 30Let both of them grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Collect the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’

It may not make any sense in human terms, but God is different from us: He is The Creator. And, because He is Infinite, there is no earthly way that us limited finite humans can figure out a Supreme Being who is Infinite.

 

[Richard_Powers]

Alright, let’s try another approach. What would such evidence that this baby was loved by God look like to a non-believer such as yourself?

Can anything that can back up the assertion that God loves all humans. Since you know this to be true you should already have this evidence unless you have accepted this assertion without evidence.

 

[Richard_Powers]

It may not make any sense in human terms, but God is different from us: He is The Creator. And, because He is Infinite, there is no earthly way that us limited finite humans can figure out a Supreme Being who is Infinite.

If God does not make sense in human term then you cannot know anything about God since humans are forced by nature to understand things in human terms only. Even revelations would still have to go through our human understanding. If God does not make sense in human understanding how can you say God loves all humans?

 

[VociMike]

Can anything that can back up the assertion that God loves all humans. Since you know this to be true you should already have this evidence unless you have accepted this assertion without evidence.

I can only accept this assertion on faith, by accepting what the Church teaches about the nature and designs of God. And teaches not just intellectually, but in the very lives of Christ and the saints. I consider that to be evidence, but not proof.

Now, can you back up your assertion that a God who loves every human being would not allow such suffering? Or have you accepted this assertion without proof, which is to say, on faith?

 

[theistgal]

I have not experienced any suffering personally that is causing me to ask these question, but I look around the world and see so much suffering and I know of the suffering that people experienced in the past. I am not trying to disrupt anyone. I am trying to understand.

If you really want to understand, why don’t you talk to (or better yet, listen to) people who have suffered and ask them what they think? If you haven’t experienced any suffering personally, then you don’t really know whether or not it has any redemptive qualities.

But I’ve been sick for a long time - a few years ago I had a cold turned into a viral infection (possibly pneumonia, I’m not really sure), and it dragged on for months and months. It was difficult for me to get out of bed in the morning, and I missed a lot of work. And I felt really miserable, not only physically but mentally, because at the time I was single and didn’t have anyone to take care of me. So I know what suffering is.

But I also remember that there finally came a day when I woke up one morning and, even though I was still sick, I could feel, deep inside, that the infection was gone. I still had the symptoms but I felt so much better that I was able to go outside and look at the world around me with new eyes. I appreciated all the simple, ordinary things in my life that I’d taken for granted before - like walking outside to get the mail, driving to the store, working in my garden.

And if I hadn’t suffered that sickness for so long, maybe I would still be slogging along, bored and tired of life.

So you need to know, if you don’t already, that suffering is not always bad. And once again - getting back to my first post in this thread, which I don’t think you really read - if you believe there is another life after this one, then there is a basis for hoping that the suffering in this life which seems only to end in death will somehow lead to an even greater appreciation of, and gratitude for, whatever comes next.

 

[Richard_Powers]

So you need to know, if you don’t already, that suffering is not always bad. And once again - getting back to my first post in this thread, which I don’t think you really read - if you believe there is another life after this one, then there is a basis for hoping that the suffering in this life which seems only to end in death will somehow lead to an even greater appreciation of, and gratitude for, whatever comes next.

I take it you have not read the entire thread. I already addressed this.

 

[theistgal]

I take it you have not read the entire thread. I already addressed this.

I think I’ve read more of it than you have.

I’m outta here, as I don’t think you’re really serious about having a discussion. I got enough of that at the Internet Infidels.

 

[Richard_Powers]

I can only accept this assertion on faith, by accepting what the Church teaches about the nature and designs of God. And teaches not just intellectually, but in the very lives of Christ and the saints. I consider that to be evidence, but not proof.

This isn’t evidence just more assertions

Now, can you back up your assertion that a God who loves every human being would not allow such suffering? Or have you accepted this assertion without proof, which is to say, on faith?

Love in shown through action. Now, maybe this is the best universe possible. Maybe God had to create a universe where some would suffer and die. But when God made the universe he choose to create it knowing it was universe where they would suffer and die. It is not just that God cannot do anything to stop hurting them without creating something even worse. God actively created the situation. If we take loving someone to also mean creating a situation where they would suffer and die without understanding, loving someone loses all meaning.

Answer me this, what would it take for you to say that you don’t know if God loves every human if seeing babies suffer and die without understanding does not? Is there anything that would make you question the unsupported assertion that God loves every human?

 

[Al_Masetti]

If God does not make sense in human term then you cannot know anything about God since humans are forced by nature to understand things in human terms only. Even revelations would still have to go through our human understanding. If God does not make sense in human understanding how can you say God loves all humans?

We can know ONE thing: That God is God; that He is not human. That He is Infinite (and we have a general, but not complete, idea what infinity entails. And we know that we humans do not even come close to any of His qualities.

Sometimes, when I say the Apostles Creed, I start off … "I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth … " and I stop and start to meditate just on the three words … “… Creator of Heaven …” and I become totally overwhelmed.

Just imagine: this Person we call God … created Heaven.