Does God Have Human Emotions?

What, exactly, does it mean that "God is all"? It must be a deep and expansive concept if it renders any questions about God "Irrelevant".
Yes, it would render many of the religion's depictions of God irrelevant. But I'm sure you've heard of that concept before.
God is the emanating force and substance that is the Universe. We are all .... everything is..... bits of God..
 
I don’t buy the free will argument by Christians as a weak explanation and excuse for needless suffering. Humans are and should be held accountable, not by any deity. By the codes of conduct in their own societies.
So it sounds like we agree that a lot of unnecessary suffering is a result of the choices humans make, which most people call free will, and not because of some design flaw in the universe.

I am on Team Rousseau and never quite understood calling earthquakes, floods, and forest fires 'evil'.

Theodicy is still a great debate and an unresolved question.
In Dostoyevsky's parable of the Grand Inquisitor a Bishop of the Spanish inquisition tells a returned Jesus that he set an impossibly high moral bar for humans to clear, and they were always destined to fail living up to those standards. The bishop said giving humans freedom was a mistake, and it would have been better if God had taken away human free will and just forced everyone to act by those high standards.
 
Last edited:
So it sounds like we agree that a lot of unnecessary suffering is a result of the choices humans make, which most people call free will, and not because of some design flaw in the universe.

I am on Team Rousseau and never quite understood calling earthquakes, floods, and forest fires 'evil'.

Theodicy is still a great debate and an unresolved question.
In Dostoyevsky's parable of the Grand Inquisitor a Bishop of the Spanish inquisition tells a returned Jesus that he set an impossibly high moral bar for humans to clear, and they were always destined to fail living up to those standards. The bishop said giving humans freedom was a mistake, and it would have been better if God had taken away human free will and just forced everyone to act by those high standards.
Yes. Our choices, especially on the environment, have created scenarios for natural disasters. Floods, wildfires, etc. No doubt. I don’t see that as “unnecessary suffering”, however. Unintended consequences, perhaps. Some would use the term “evil”, but I’m not much of an adherent to that word. It insinuates a god somehow to me.

I’m talking about direct and intentional cruelty in this world. But also, things like infant disease and starvation.

I don’t know about that ‘design flaw’ in the universe. Rather a flaw in humans, whether designed or not. For me, no design.
 
Yes. Our choices, especially on the environment, have created scenarios for natural disasters. Floods, wildfires, etc. No doubt. I don’t see that as “unnecessary suffering”, however. Unintended consequences, perhaps. Some would use the term “evil”, but I’m not much of an adherent to that word. It insinuates a god somehow to me.

I’m talking about direct and intentional cruelty in this world. But also, things like infant disease and starvation.

I don’t know about that ‘design flaw’ in the universe. Rather a flaw in humans, whether designed or not. For me, no design.
Fair enough, I get your overall gist.

I'm still not sure what you mean by unnecessary and intentional cruelty.

Intentional means it is inflicted by human choice, again back to human free will rather than a flaw of divine Providence (unless we are willing to be stripped of free will and free choice).

Starvation is completely avoidable, and generally only happens because of human decisions and human corruption.

Death from disease is unfortunate, and can even feel unfair. On the other hand, the reason and cognitive powers we are imbued with has resulted in technology that provides extremely low child mortality rates and average lifespans extending into our 70s. We really shouldn't be expected to live past 40 if we only existed in the context of natural biological evolution.
 
Fair enough, I get your overall gist.

I'm still not sure what you mean by unnecessary and intentional cruelty.

Intentional means it is inflicted by human choice, again back to human free will rather than a flaw of divine Providence (unless we are willing to be stripped of free will and free choice).

Starvation is completely avoidable, and generally only happens because of human decisions and human corruption.

Death from disease is unfortunate, and can even feel unfair. On the other hand, the reason and cognitive powers we are imbued with has resulted in technology that provides extremely low child mortality rates and average lifespans extending into our 70s. We really shouldn't be expected to live past 40 if we only existed in the context of natural biological evolution.
There is intentional, such as the Holocaust, animal cruelty or child abuse. Then, there is unnecessary, such as childhood cancer, disease, famine. Unnecessary in the context of the omni-everything Christian god.

Those are easily explained in the absence of such a deity. “Shit happens”. But those are not so easily explained in the context of the all-powerful, all-living god.
 
Yes, it would render many of the religion's depictions of God irrelevant. But I'm sure you've heard of that concept before.
God is the emanating force and substance that is the Universe. We are all .... everything is..... bits of God..

Yes I have heard it and it really sounds like little more than glossalalia. But it's what some people like
 
There is intentional, such as the Holocaust, animal cruelty or child abuse. Then, there is unnecessary, such as childhood cancer, disease, famine. Unnecessary in the context of the omni-everything Christian god.

Those are easily explained in the absence of such a deity. “Shit happens”. But those are not so easily explained in the context of the all-powerful, all-living god.
An all powerful god who has no control over what happen. Weird.
 
All powerful and totally impotent to prevent suffering. Makes no sense.
It isn't impotence, according to the Christians I know it is a consequence of sin which was a product of free will. If their god were to take away all suffering he would also have to take away your ability to make your own choices...

There is also the aspect that suffering reminds humans of their temporary nature, and that god has delayed judgment to allow time for you to change your mind.

Personally, as I said before, a God who takes attendance on Sundays is an absurdity. If you make something with free will then demand it love you inevitably you will be disappointed...
 
It isn't impotence, according to the Christians I know it is a consequence of sin which was a product of free will. If their god were to take away all suffering he would also have to take away your ability to make your own choices...

There is also the aspect that suffering reminds humans of their temporary nature, and that god has delayed judgment to allow time for you to change your mind.

Personally, as I said before, a God who takes attendance on Sundays is an absurdity. If you make something with free will then demand it love you inevitably you will be disappointed...
Yes, it is bad logic. Either god cannot prevent suffering and is not all powerful. Or god can prevent suffering and he's a sadist.
 
It isn't impotence, according to the Christians I know it is a consequence of sin which was a product of free will. If their god were to take away all suffering he would also have to take away your ability to make your own choices...

There is also the aspect that suffering reminds humans of their temporary nature, and that god has delayed judgment to allow time for you to change your mind.

Personally, as I said before, a God who takes attendance on Sundays is an absurdity. If you make something with free will then demand it love you inevitably you will be disappointed...
You fail to address unnecessary suffering of animals. Nothing to do with human free will.

Or childhood disease, birth defects, famine, pestilence.
 
Back
Top