You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

1
2

[–] chirogonemd 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

You are applying a very human perspective on these events to the being of God. You are talking about defying universal principles of the creation of man and the universe to satisfy a moral concept of your own empathic processes. God, at no point, ever promised any one of his creations zero suffering, not until kingdom come. Which it hasn't. Free will opens up the world to the influence of evil, making everyone vulnerable. Nowhere does God suggest we are all immune to it. This idea that God should do this is simply a human one. An entitlement mentality for something you never had title to. The world and life are suffering. Not until the kingdom of Heaven is there the type of existence you suggest.

This is Earth. Not Heaven.

0
3

[–] ANGRY_Hippopotamus 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

And you are doing the same. You give god a pass on whatever because from your perspective he can do no wrong, which is your human idea of what god is. Even when the wrong is obvious.

I take a step back and see that the world makes far more sense when you realise that there is no god and the only justice and goodness there will ever be are the ones we make ourselves.

0
0

[–] chirogonemd 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I am saying there is no right and wrong which we can posit on it. That difference is linguistically subtle, but massive in meaning. You are saying that we can judge it as right and wrong, and this is the fundamental flaw I pointed out from the very beginning.