Mockingbird
New member
Here, go crazy. I'll even get you started.
<blockquote>Quote
<hr><i>Originally posted by: <b>WinAce</b></i>
I submit that NO ONE would buy this "mysterious reasons" argument if it was used to defend anyone except God from self-evidently irrational behavior. That's what this claimed intervention in people's medical care, the way God allegedly does it, comes down to -- divine irrationality. It obeys no discernible pattern, works towards no identifiable goals, benefits no consistent group, and omits helping those who, arguably, deserve it the most.
WITHOUT the <i>a priori</i> assumption that God is good and infallible, what does the seemingly arbitrary nature of how illness affects people suggest? I would argue it's <i>undeniably</i> "No god exists," "A god exists who doesn't care about humanity," or "God is crazy." For every person you can point to who fervently believes God helped, 10 others believed equally well that God <i>would</i> help--and died in agony anyway. For every person allegedly made stronger by crippling illness, not only is there another who received such insight <i>without</i> having to suffer, but there are 5 whose illness had no major positive effect on their lives, and served only to detract from it. CF and other illnesses have <i>no</i> redeeming qualities that would make even a <i>human</i> consider intentionally creating them, much less an omnipotence that could implement those hypothetical "greater goods" in a wide variety of other, comparatively painless ways.
That grown adults can seriously entertain the thought an omnipotent God would need to resort to striking down someone's siblings with horrifying illness, in order to teach them a lesson about life or some such bizarre nonsense, is downright intellectually insulting. That's the problem, in a nutshell. People are <i>taught</i> that "God has a plan," merely because their ancestors believed it, and then prefer accepting ad hoc non-explanations like the above to salvage that belief and shield it from questioning, rather than acknowledging that the ancients could have been mistaken.
God doesn't choose one person over another for a transplant. Assuming a benevolent God, such beliefs--the equivalent of him being racist, sexist, or otherwise capriciously arbitrary--are nonsense of the highest order. And assuming an evil, capricious one, why call such an entity "God" in the first place?
</rant><hr></blockquote>
I don't believe anything you say, and I refer you to the book of Job.
<blockquote>Quote
<hr><i>Originally posted by: <b>WinAce</b></i>
I submit that NO ONE would buy this "mysterious reasons" argument if it was used to defend anyone except God from self-evidently irrational behavior. That's what this claimed intervention in people's medical care, the way God allegedly does it, comes down to -- divine irrationality. It obeys no discernible pattern, works towards no identifiable goals, benefits no consistent group, and omits helping those who, arguably, deserve it the most.
WITHOUT the <i>a priori</i> assumption that God is good and infallible, what does the seemingly arbitrary nature of how illness affects people suggest? I would argue it's <i>undeniably</i> "No god exists," "A god exists who doesn't care about humanity," or "God is crazy." For every person you can point to who fervently believes God helped, 10 others believed equally well that God <i>would</i> help--and died in agony anyway. For every person allegedly made stronger by crippling illness, not only is there another who received such insight <i>without</i> having to suffer, but there are 5 whose illness had no major positive effect on their lives, and served only to detract from it. CF and other illnesses have <i>no</i> redeeming qualities that would make even a <i>human</i> consider intentionally creating them, much less an omnipotence that could implement those hypothetical "greater goods" in a wide variety of other, comparatively painless ways.
That grown adults can seriously entertain the thought an omnipotent God would need to resort to striking down someone's siblings with horrifying illness, in order to teach them a lesson about life or some such bizarre nonsense, is downright intellectually insulting. That's the problem, in a nutshell. People are <i>taught</i> that "God has a plan," merely because their ancestors believed it, and then prefer accepting ad hoc non-explanations like the above to salvage that belief and shield it from questioning, rather than acknowledging that the ancients could have been mistaken.
God doesn't choose one person over another for a transplant. Assuming a benevolent God, such beliefs--the equivalent of him being racist, sexist, or otherwise capriciously arbitrary--are nonsense of the highest order. And assuming an evil, capricious one, why call such an entity "God" in the first place?
</rant><hr></blockquote>
I don't believe anything you say, and I refer you to the book of Job.