The Berean
Well-known member
They went to Baltimore. :chuckle:
The city of Cleveland went to Baltimore? :idunno:
They went to Baltimore. :chuckle:
I would think that a god who has the power to influence events and cares more about the performance of an athlete than that of the plight of thousands of starving or otherwise suffering human beings is contemptible and unworthy of any worship or praise.
Is it your view that God should feed every starving person and heal every sick person and stop all violence?
If I see a woman being raped, and do nothing, what kind of person am I? If I see people starving, and do nothing and say nothing, what kind of person am I? If am able to cure cancer, but withhold my knowledge, what kind of person am I?
In the same way, if god is able, and does not, god is immoral.
If god does not exist, that explains a lot of suffering.
Deus Creator Omnium | |
You only bring this forward as an objection because you don't see the world as God sees it.
Actually it was Epicurus who first raised the objection, and it was because it is a logical objection to make based upon observation.
I raise the objection here as it relates to the topic in that if god favors athlete performance over human suffering, what kind of god is he/she?
Stabat Mater Dolorosa | |
Anima Christi | |
If you know Epicurus, then you should welcome my answer: it's neoplatonic.
I wouldn't say that God favors athlete performance over human suffering. What I would say is that God has care for all of the details. Everything fits into the divine plan. Everything has a place in the world that God has made.
The problem is one of perspective.
Nonetheless, God has given us a peek into his plan. From Christian revelation, suffering no longer is purely problematic. We know that suffering has meaning. Suffering has value. It is useful for our salvation.
Remember: Christ suffered. "But he was wounded for our iniquities, he was bruised for our sins: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his bruises we are healed" (Isaiah 53:5).
I recommend praying the sorrowful mysteries of the Rosary. While you do, contemplate:
1. The five wounds of Christ.
2. The sorrow of Jesus and Mary. Consider how the sword of sorrow pierced the Immaculate Heart of Mary, who had to watch her divine son suffer. Consider the sorrow which filled the Sacred Heart of Jesus, who had to behold the sorrow of His mother.
3. The love for sinners which filled the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the lance which pierced the Sacred Heart, and the blood and water which gushed forth for our salvation.
All of which is based upon assumptions we do not share, and ignores the logic of Epicurus' dilemma.
And additionally I take exception with a god who finds human suffering "useful".
Then give me the dilemma again, that I may examine it's logic. :idunno:
The same things are not useful to a healthy person and a sick person. We normally shouldn't cut or burn people. But doesn't a doctor cut and burn his patients, if it is useful for the restoration of their health?
In any case, I don't think that I can convince you one way or the other. But practically, I think that you'll find an answer if you simply take my advice: the cross appears differently to the eyes of the world and to the eyes of faith.
Approach Jesus and Mary at Calvary (through the Rosary; I promise, miracles are possible through the Rosary...you just have to know what miracles to ask for), even if you have the eyes of the world. And ask for the eyes of faith. If you do, I suspect that your way of looking at things might change some day.
The full quote goes as follows.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
Perhaps so, but to cause suffering to force someone to agree with you isn't the same thing as removing someone's appendix to save their life and comparison is apples and oranges.
I've certainly spent a lot of time praying; I don't think adding a rosary would have any impact.
So, if this were God you'd worship him?If I see a woman being raped, and do nothing, what kind of person am I? If I see people starving, and do nothing and say nothing, what kind of person am I? If am able to cure cancer, but withhold my knowledge, what kind of person am I?
In the same way, if god is able, and does not, god is immoral.
If god does not exist, that explains a lot of suffering.
So, if this were God you'd worship him?
I always have a point. However, you're leap to dismissal without waiting for an answer warrants I dismiss you; as I assume most here have done already.Do you have a point? No? Ok, well then you are dismissed.
Tiger Woods (a Buddhist) proves you wrong.
Does God help some athletes more than others in sports?