If there were no God


#242

No it isn’t. You’ve yet to establish otherwise besides by raw fiat. Which is fine, but it’s pseudo-religion.


#243

It’s called vegetarianism. Many prey species manage to live that way.

I can’t tell you what God’s goals and purposes might be, although I am told that one must not do evil in order that good may come.


#244

Sure. And there are plenty of granola-munchers that would be happy to bombard you with academic treatises on the possibility of a pain response in all sorts of plant-life…


#245

I can’t tell you what God’s goals and purposes might be, although I am told that one must not do evil in order that good may come.

If (1) God is fully actual, and therefore fully intelligent, and (2) you do not know God’s plan or goals, then how could you possibly claim to make a “better Universe”?


#246

Fortunately, I’m told, God is omnipotent.


#247

Who on earth said that this onmipotent god would always use its potency in a way you liked?


#248

I’m not claiming to make a universe at all.


#249

No one. And indeed if He exists, He evidently hasn’t.


#250

Well there ya go. Now to decide, if it’s even knowable, which of you is wrong? If this theoretical god sets the rules by definition, then you can guess how I’ll vote.


#251

I prayed virtually non stop over the course of about 2 years. My health deteriorated. It’s quite interesting that after I stopped practicing my faith, I got better. I attribute it more to the medication, however.


#252

Obviously you’re not MAKING a Universe…

But you said you could think of better one.


#253

Why can’t medication be an answer to prayer? It probably was.


#254

The mobility is not the point. The ability to regenerate is. The only positive effect of pain is that it is a warning system. If there is no need for such a system then pain has no reason to exist.

Of course the “distribution” of pain does not point to a rational “designer”. Toothache can be excruciating, while cancer is painless in the first stages, when it still could be cured. Of course the pain “itself” is not the problem. The unnecessary, gratuitous pain and suffering is. And it is definitely the job of the apologists to prove that every instance of pain is “beneficial”, and no pain is gratuitous. Good luck to do that.


#255

And it is definitely the job of the apologists to prove that every instance of pain is “beneficial”, and no pain is gratuitous.

No, it is not. The atheist is the one who claims that it is unlikely for God to bring a greater good out of certain specific evils. It is on the atheist to show why this is the case.

Once the existence of God and his nature is established, then we proceed knowing that God, with supreme intelligence, power, and goodness, CAN bring goodness out of evil. And Revelation confirms this. See Christ for more.


#256

Would be as logical as saying that quitting religion provided me help. It’s quite egotistical for prayer to always provide the answer when it is a “good” result, but never the problem when there is a bad result. Can’t have your cake and eat it to.


#257

We do not share a common view of nature.

The ultimate reality is Existence.

We are not a species of animal, but rather a different form of being from other creatures. Animals and mankind share a physical nature, having many structural, physiological and emotional similarities. However, the actual substance of what we are, the type of being that is a person is totally different from that of animals.

So it’s not a matter of one species influencing another, but rather has to do with the meaning of the universe, culminating in the creation of mankind. We are composed of the same stuff as everything else, and can understand ourselves to be the universe, participating within itself through individual components relating to all that is other to their individual selves. It’s hard to jump out of one paradigm into another, but imagine how we, as an expression of everything, bring everything down with us when we choose wnader from the Centre from which everything comes into being.

The ultimate aim is that the universe come to know and its creator. This may sound Buddhist but suffering comes when we lose what has been illusory the whole time, never ours and leading to death. When we adhere to what is transient, we go with it and hence towards nothingness and the pain that comes with it. But, we are not doomed to eternal separation; we can get there through the choices we make in our lives. We can become Love itself in and through Jesus Christ.


#258

It’s not established. It’s an opinion.


#259

Perhaps?

Simply saying “practicing religion” does not equate to doing God’s will.

But anyway, it doesn’t follow. The point is rather that in God’s supreme providence, answer to prayer is much, much more than the “miraculous.” Remember that God is the foundation of all reality and existence. It’s not as if he’s just another being within the Universe – e.g., “the god of miracles”


#260

We cannot know God’s will, remember? He works in mysterious ways. Maybe his will is that I kill half of the humans on the planet?


#261

But the Christian has no problem. It’s about consistency. Once God’s existence is established, then certain things follow. It’s the atheist in this case who is claiming certain specific (physical) evil counts as evidence against God.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.