The issue with God isn't that bad things happen, the issue is that none of his decree or authority, or moral values, seem to be consistent. If God were consistently evil we could conclude he's simply an asshole, if God were consistently good, he would actually be representative of the Christian God, but in reality he's neither wholly bad or good, he's extremely inconsistent in fact, it's almost as if he's the product of many generations of some desert people's imagination. Everything he does can be better explain naturalistically rather than supernaturally
1. This is so incoherent I can’t even tell what point you’re trying to make 2. Nothing can be explained naturalistically
>>18721847>2. Nothing can be explained naturalisticallyAnd heeeere we go!
>>18721847Repent of your sins. Do not question God. We all deserve his wrath because we are sinners! Who are you to question him? You are the clay and he the potterer Let me guess you like Jesus's teachings but don't like some of the stories in the old testament?God is sovereign. Whatever he decrees is moral and whatever he forbids is immoral. Having faith in your life is very important, especially as you age and get older.John 3:16 King James Version16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.Romans 9:20-22 King James Version20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
>>18721847>naturalistically rather than supernaturallyI don't agree with your definition of these words.
>>18721856Am I wrong?
>>18721876Stop being anti-semantic
>>18721881Its just, I probably agree with your sentiment, I just don't agree with how you are using the words, and I don't think it relates to how the words are used historically in a lot of these ancient texts."supernatural" is a modern secular label for ghosts, or something akin to a ghost. Basically a phantom or magical thing. The gospel addresses this.When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear. But Jesus immediately said to them: “Take courage! It is I ( ἐγώ ).Obviously the concept of "being" exists. The ego exist. I, exist. I am not talking about a ghost. I am talking about "being". Our experiance is "supernatural". Ghosts and magic are straw man arguments. Its a waste of time. You're not actually addressing the theology or philosophy about the experience of "being".
>>18721892>"supernatural" is a modern secular label for ghosts, or something akin to a ghost. Basically a phantom or magical thing. The gospel addresses this.I understand what you're saying. To me the term "supernatural" implies anything beyond the natural realm or natural explanation, in modern colloquialism this mostly just means ghosts, but I think formally it just means anything beyond the natural world. God himself for example would be supernatural, but the world and its laws within that he created are natural.
>>18721847>Everything he does can be better explain naturalistically rather than supernaturallyIf everything can be described "naturalistically" then you're just asserting a fate structure of cause an effect mechanics. Then God is not a "He". It becomes an It.The whole point of calling God He is to reinforce the idea of being. Wr are not talking about mechanical cause and effect. We are talking about this exact experiance right now.By focusing on the supernatual aspect, free will and agency is reinforced. Its more empowering and encourages conciousness, rather then automated dead mechanics.
>>18721871I don't like retarded teachings. Suppose you take into consideration: turn the other cheek. My idea is, I pierce your left cheek with a cutter, then I rip a bit, the sliced opening, pulsaring with blood is then filled with rot worms, so I have them eat a bit, so you're well disgusted, then I plant insect (parasitary) eggs in the wound and heal and close it so they grow inside. Naturally, this behaviour may seem displeasing to you, yet, here we have a book thst bluntly says: give him your other cheek. It's simply not very wise. Unless you're scientifically minded.
>>18721907You can acknowledge the mechanical nature of reality and still find spirituality beyond this, that's more or less what Deism and Pantheism are. eventually you come to a point where you have to do this, because you otherwise reach a conclusion that God simply "works in mysterious ways" beyond out epistemological horizon presumably, but this effectively de-personalizes him, it implies his motivations are not relevant to us, only the natural products of them, but this is what naturalists believe anyways because they're generally instrumentalists
>>18721911Ah, mistery in ways. SoJunki Furuta was a mystery. It sure is a mystery people still pay for this.
>>18721892>>18721901I define natural to be a material thing which exists independently of the activity of God, either originally or continually (i.e. a thing can be created by God but nevertheless be natural if it does not rely on God to continue existing). Natural things do not and can not exist. All things are of a supernatural substance, i.e. dependent upon the providence of God for being. Why does the earth move around the sun? One may appeal to natural law and say that it must because of this or that rule under these circumstances, but that explains *how* it moves around the sun, and not *why*, i.e. why the earth moves around the sun, instead of some other rule, nor could it ever explain this no matter how detailed our understanding of the rules themselves becomes. While this lies undiscovered we can hardly claim to have explained the motion of the earth, and therefore naturalism neither does nor could explain it or any other thing. The reason for natural law is that it is the divine order imposed by God, and natural law is really nothing but the manifestation of divine providence, and differs from miracles not in substance but only in the accident of quantity.
>>18721901We shouldn't explain everything "naturally". Nature is a tool. It tells us how. The supernatural decides "why". Morals must include the supernatural. There is something beyond the simple mechanics of "how", and it's superior, because it is the motivator. The natural selector is not random, and its not just about survival. Sometimes, we just chose what we like.
>>18721880Yes
>>18721924See >>18721918I also think this is a good answer to Hume’s objection. If there is no real distinction between miracles and natural laws, his argument just doesn’t make any sense.
>>18721918This kind of reasoning is why I choose to believe in creation ex nihilo. If nothing exists independently of God, then my will is not trapped inside a closed system of autonomous natural causes. Every moment of existence remains open to divine action, which means my freedom is not limited by impersonal laws or deterministic matter. Instead, my will participates directly in a reality that is continually upheld by God. True freedom is not independence from God, but the capacity to act within the living order He sustains. Creation ex nihilo therefore does not diminish the will, it grounds and empowers it.
>>18721847>moral values, do not seem to be consistent.This is subjective morality. Post modernism and subjective morality is based on the the laws of Me and I.However God's law is based on You and Us. "He" (being) is Collective, universal, catholic, orthodox morality. Not secular (individual and short term) morality. Nor is morality some mechanical fate drivine dead equation.Morality is negotiated, which is why the primary command is not one comand but two.Love the lord.Your God. Yes. But also, love your neighbor as yourself.All the law and everything prophessed hangs on These commands.
>>18721847>he's the product of many generations of some desert people's imagination."Desert" means "wandering, testing, and radical dependence on God"
>>18722117ה is the product of many generations of the image of God, wandering around and being tested.
>>18721847Correct but unfortunately this board is overwhelmingly used by 70 IQ American evangelicals so good luck getting them to understand anything
