[Closed] God's will

Back to why would a loving god allow good people to suffer...... I don't have any great answers, and I've given this a lot of thought.
Accepting that people die for numerous reasons, sometimes unfortunate genetics, sometimes infection, sometimes from floods or earthquakes, wars, pollution, accident, etc. If God's Will were to intervene to prevent all those deaths, then how would the earth actually function? Would He suddenly put a stop to the way biology works? Should he prevent people from killing others? Should he stop people from doing all those 21st century things that cause premature death? Should he kill bacteria and viruses that kill innocent people but are also vital to the way the earth works?

If God's Will were to intervene to prevent all those deaths, then how would the earth actually function? Would He suddenly put a stop to the way biology works? Should he prevent people from killing others? Should he stop people from doing all those 21st century things that cause premature death? Should he kill bacteria and viruses that kill innocent people but are also vital to the way the earth works?

So what the hell happens in heaven ?

I was hoping that heaven might be somewhere to look forward to.

what I mean is, as tragic and horrible as things are in this world, I don't think they are caused by God's Will.
I'm feeling pretty gloomy at the moment myself. 🙁

I'm feeling pretty gloomy at the moment myself.

Cheer up ! 🙂

If you've got a cat or dog, or even a young child, just go and look at them......they don't ponder about life and its meaning, they just get on with enjoying life.

There's a lesson for us all there.

If He created a world in which human suffering is required in order for it to "work" then he's not very clever, is he?

Omnipotence and stupidity in the same deity,what hope is there?

Ernie lynch- the cat is my best bet for something that enjoys life without pondering the meaning 🙂

I'm not sure that you can compare early human belief systems (animism, totemism) with organised religion. Plus all of the madonnas scattered about would suggest that people worshipped the matriarch as in canario culture up to arrival of the Spanish in the C16th. Religions picked up earlier belief systems and integrated them into a new world view which is why christianity, islam and judaism all have a similar take on the creation of the universe.
If we are to compare humans with apes then we should confine ourselves to the bonobo ape which is closest to us genetically, and lives a highly social, highly sexual and peaceful existence (without a religion).

I am bemused by how religious ideas can lead to a rise in the sale of over-priced dried milk. Marvelous much!

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/26/blood-moon-mormon-church-apocalypse-warning

http://beprepared.com/

They don't seem to do dried beer. I'm out.

Out of my small staff, i have a couple of Christians - one a church goer, who isnt quite sure he understands what he believes in, but it helps him, the other two fundamentalist Christians, with two kids in school who are batshit mental.

After the Nepalese earthquake, fundamentalist Christian told other Christian that it was god's will all the people had died. Other Christian went ballistic at him and how he could be so insensitive and clueless.

edit - he isn;t batshit due to being a Christian, just due to being clueless, God must have blinked when he sprinkled savvy and common sense onb the family

Thankfully this happened no where near me, and I didn't have to reprimand either of them for it.

I'm not sure that you can compare early human belief systems (animism, totemism) with organised religion.

Which presumably is precisely why that comparison hasn't been made.

The connection between primate human society and religious doctrine was made.

.

If we are to compare humans with apes then we should confine ourselves to the bonobo ape which is closest to us genetically, and lives a highly social, highly sexual and peaceful existence (without a religion).

A species which lives in peaceful matriarchal societies is hardly a good comparison to humans. A much better comparison would be chimpanzees which are violent towards members of their own species and live in patriarchal societies, and with which we are as closely related to as bonobos.

And how do you know bonobos are "without a religion"? How do you know they don't have a spiritual belief system? I can only assume that you don't know and are working on the assumption that they are incapable of having religious beliefs.

Which makes your point rather silly - it's hardly surprising that they don't do something which they are incapable of doing.

which is why christianity, islam and judaism all have a similar take on the creation of the universe.

They are all Abrhamic faiths and share the same lineage, abrhaham, Moses, etc

They disagree on whether jesus was the son of god, a prophet or neither
IIRC Judaism is just the OT or a number from that

They diverge at certain points in their history but they have a similar take because they are the same god IMHO - not a point they accept obviously- who confusingly gave different messages to different parts of the followers creating a massive schism - god then did the same within the faith see sunni v shia or catholic v protestant

they are the same god IMHO - not a point they accept obviously

Are you sure ? I have never met a Muslim who didn't accept that their God was the same God as the Jewish and Christian God. Or a Christian that didn't accept that God is the same as the Jewish God, most I think realise that the Muslim God is the same God. Can't comment on Jews as my experience with talking to them about their religion is extremely limited/practically nonexistent, but I would be surprised if they didn't accept that they shared the same God with Christians and Muslims.

chimpanzees which are violent towards members of their own species and live in patriarchal societies, and with which we are as closely related to as bonobos

who confusingly gave different messages to different parts of the followers creating a massive schism - god then did the same within the faith see sunni v shia or catholic v protestant

I reckon all of them - Jews, Muslims and Christians and the various sub groups within those - would dispute that God gave different messages, and instead say that the others have misheard/misunderstood/got it all wrong. Which as we know has resulted in untold conflict and other horrors. Which kind of fits with the overriding story, as I understand it, of God creating something good and humans making a complete arse of it.

Yes they will mishandle the data and reach the wrong conclusion 😉

In fairness the sunni v shia thing is because the prophet failed to name a heir - simplified massively. However clearly jews and all christians worship the same god.
However if I build[ create] a wheel and it fails I dont blame the wheel

Yes, I agree, and I think Ernie is right that most or at least some of them would recognise that too.

you will find we were much more bonobo than chimp in hunter-gatherer society, cooperation not conflict ensured survival

I'm sorry you didn't make it clear that you were talking about in prehistory times when you said "if we are to compare humans with apes" I assumed that you were talking of the present.

I fully accept the theory of primitive communism when humans lived in classless societies in which each contributed according to their ability and received according to their needs.

Of course after hundreds of thousands of years of primitive communism it all went pear-shaped with the arrival of surplus, accumulative wealth/money, and class systems/class antagonism.

It's interesting to note that this prehistory human story is remarkably like the religious equivalent.

Man once lived in Paradise where all his needs were satisfied and everything was peaceful happy and there was no sin. Then man fell to the temptation of greed, everything thereafter changed. He was banished from the Garden of Eden and was surround by misery violence and greed. His sins and greed were passed down to each new generation.

You could call both stories "The Fall of Man".

Btw, bonobos are no more closer related to humans than chimpanzees. Perhaps there's another story about the "The Fall of Chimpanzees"? Perhaps chimpanzees were once bonobos which fell to sin/greed?

bonobos are no more closer related to humans than chimpanzees

We obviously read different books on genetics. Engels, incidentally, in 'The role played by labour in the ascent from ape to man' dismisses the idea of animals making art. You should read it.

Engels, incidentally, in 'The role played by labour in the ascent from ape to man' dismisses the idea of animals making art. You should read it.

He might well have dismissed the idea of animals making art but as far as I am aware Engels was not a noted naturalist/zoologist, so I'm not sure either why I should read the opinions of a non-expert or why you attach so much importance to it.

This is artwork created by an animal :

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

That artwork is created for [i]exactly[/i] the same reason as humans create artwork - because it is considered to be aesthetically pleasing. Note the creativity which goes beyond choosing brightly coloured objects but also considers form, shape, contrast, and arrangement.

Do they change with the times? Is there a futurist, surrealist or a cubist version? Nice pictures but this rather smacks of personification.

Obvious they change with the times. Plastic baubles, sweetie wrappers?

Anthropomorphise not personification surely?

and errr... No billmc, rather like the bower bird you are clutching at straws

Do they change with the times?

So you've changed from dismissing the idea of animals making art to now dismissing the idea that fashion exists in other species.

I don't know whether fashion exists with regards to the above examples, quite possibly I imagine - why not ?

Btw it was once thought, certainly in Engels's time, that one of the big distinguishing factors between humans and all other species was that only humans used tools. Then it was discovered that chimpanzees can learn how to use tools in a completely natural environment. Much more recently it has been discovered that crows can not only use tools but can actually make tools by shaping an object - up that point it was considered that only humans could do that sort of problem solving.

There is very little indeed that distinguishes humans from other species imo. The only real difference imo is morality/moral code. Or soul if you are religious.

That artwork is created for exactly the same reason as humans create artwork

How do you know?

I would have assumed the primary reason for animal artwork is to impress a potential mate with a view to getting a quick leg trembler.

That artwork is created for exactly the same reason as humans create artwork

How do you know?

I think it's fairly obvious that the artwork was created because it is considered to be aesthetically pleasing - to include the rest of my edited sentence.

Otherwise it would fail in its intended purpose, ie, to be aesthetically pleasing.

In the examples above there is a huge amount of individual creativity.

Of course you're free to disagree. Perhaps like Fredrick Engels you think it isn't even art 🙂

.

I would have assumed the primary reason for animal artwork is to impress a potential mate with a view to getting a quick leg trembler.

And I think you also need to assume that the female bower bird appreciates art, and is in fact quite fussy. Incredibly fussy by all accounts.

Talent is a fanny magnet, eh?

EDIT : Anyway, which is your favourite? I think mine is the subtle contrast between the grey pebbles and the white shells and bones - the contrast in colours and the contrast in organic and inorganic. Although the blue straws and bottle tops score highly for creativity and going beyond the normal parameters imo.

The blue one I think, closely followed by the bones.

The last one is a bit of a mishmash, it looks like he couldn't decide what the theme should be.

Do you reckon he got a shag? Maybe from a "cuddly" female bower bird, eh?

I would hope so after that much effort.

I fully accept the theory of primitive communism when humans lived in classless societies in which each contributed according to their ability and received according to their needs.

Of course after hundreds of thousands of years of primitive communism it all went pear-shaped with the arrival of surplus, accumulative wealth/money, and class systems/class antagonism.

Ernie on top form throughout this thread
but that was my favourite

Blimey, I've just done a reduced Tour de Rutland on the road bike and this is still going on. It's utter madness to impute ideas like an aesthetic (an essentially contested concept) on animals. Not even humans can agree on aesthetics (Duchamp's latrine, Carl Andre's pile of bricks, Banksy etc). I see animals out of my window all the time, none remind me of Hockney, not much anyway.

Thank you JY but it's just basic GCSE marxism, as THM would say.

.

Not even humans can agree on aesthetics

So why the hell mention that Engels reckoned that animals don't do art then? Or are you disputing that one of the primary purposes of art, especially primitive art, is to be aesthetically pleasing?

Carl Andre's pile of bricks

Never seen it (unless he was a hod-carrier on one of the sites I've worked) was it as good as "grey pebbles with white shells and bones" ?

I've just done a reduced Tour de Rutland on the road bike

Thank you for reminding me that due to a serious bout of manflue I've missed 2 days of riding in dry sunny weather, including an arranged MTB ride yesterday which I had literally been looking forward to for several weeks 🙁

Hi folks.

So, little Johnny may pull through an operation, and give his parents the inspiration to 'thank God', or he may not pull through an operation, and so give his parents the inspiration to curse God. Either way, God's function in the situation is to have given the mind to humankind for medicine in the first place, and to redeem the situation for the better whether Johnny lives or dies.

SaxonRider, this is interesting. However, why does Johnny need an operation in the first place? Why does he have a tumor? Why did God create the conditions that allowed meningitis to evolve? These are unanswered questions for me.

Either they exist, and therefore everything that happens can be attributed to them or they don't

Lol - talk about oversimplistic 🙂 As if you could every perceive or even comprehend everything that exists or doesn't! You can only see three dimensions ffs.

Not a fairy story. A real explanation of the world around us.

Is it hell! It's a description, not an explanation! If I ask you the question 'why does the Standard Model exist?' you've got nothing. I'm not saying it was God, but a good scientist cannot possibly be so cock-sure about something they know nothing about.

Religious doctrines were developed and maintained by the ruling few to control the masses.

Hmm, in some cases undoubtedly, but not all. A bit of history should set you straight there.

I will make one contribution to this thread:
Yawn.

The figures looked more or less human. And they were engaged in religion. You could tell by the knives (it's not murder if you do it for a god).

Terry Pratchett nails it.

It's utter madness to impute ideas like an aesthetic (an essentially contested concept) on animals.

I think this thread proves unequivocally that if a god exists, it has a sense of humour that is something of a mix between monty python, chris morris and bernard manning 🙂