So if God does not intervene because God is indeed already engaged with every aspect of the world. Do we imply that God IS the fire that burns a family trapped alive in their home (if you excuse the alarming example, merely trying to clarify where God is in all this).

Just looking for some clarification, because if he is not detached, then by inference, he is attached to the pain and suffering we attribute to "Natural Evil".

(May 15, 2012 at 11:34 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: ... do we imply that God IS the fire that burns a family trapped alive in their home?

That is pantheism and, as such, antithetical to this view.

(May 15, 2012 at 11:34 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: ... (if you excuse the alarming example; merely trying to clarify where God is in all this).

It is not as if atheists appealing to emotional arguments is unusual.

(May 15, 2012 at 12:07 pm)Ryft Wrote: That is pantheism and, as such, antithetical to this view.

The question itself is quite serious thou, if God is neither detached from natural incidence, nor part of them.. WHERE is he.

Its a simple question, which so far seems unable to evoke a response free from prevarication.

(May 15, 2012 at 12:07 pm)Ryft Wrote:

(May 15, 2012 at 11:34 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: ... (if you excuse the alarming example; merely trying to clarify where God is in all this).

It is not as if atheists appealing to emotional arguments is unusual.

If we're generalising, at least atheists acknowledge when they are doing so and appeal to be excused, rather than being blind to the idea an appeal was made at all.

(May 15, 2012 at 12:07 pm)Ryft Wrote:

(May 15, 2012 at 11:34 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: ... do we imply that God IS the fire that burns a family trapped alive in their home?

That is pantheism and, as such, antithetical to this view.

From a panentheistic point of view both the fire and the family are within God. God is not an entity outside of physical reality, but rather physical reality is within God.

(May 15, 2012 at 12:12 pm)NoMoreFaith Wrote: The question itself is quite serious though: If God is neither detached from natural incidents, nor part of them, [then] WHERE is he?

"Where" is a spatial question that is intelligible only in the context of spatial coordinates. Given that God created and upholds this space-time manifold, it follows that he transcends it (or exists independent of it); how, then, is it meaningful to ask specifically "where" God is? (Hint: The question is meaningless.) The very reason why God is omnipresent or immanent throughout all space and time is because he is not existentially part of creation.

(May 15, 2012 at 12:12 pm)NoMoreFaith Wrote: At least atheists acknowledge when they are doing so and appeal to be excused, rather than being blind to the idea an appeal was made at all.

You did. Here. This time. But you peruse these forums just as I do; you know how pervasive the appeals to emotional arguments are (e.g., hand-wringing about all teh baybeez) and that there is almost never that acknowledgment. But it is to be expected: if your argument has no logical punch, deflect using an emotional one.

(May 15, 2012 at 12:28 am)Godschild Wrote: To live an amazing life for Christ.

I'd ask for a refund.

(May 15, 2012 at 11:20 am)Ryft Wrote: "As suggested by Richard Bube, if God were to unplug himself in that way from the cosmos, we and everything else in the cosmos would simply cease to exist.

Oh great, we're not even real then.

Why doesn't he get bored and simply unplug himself?

I'm bored out of my fucking skull and feel like turning this computer off and if I did nothing of consequence would happen.

(May 15, 2012 at 7:11 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: Out of curiosity, how do you define "baby"?

A very young human.

But like I said, its murdering anyone which is contrary to love.

(May 15, 2012 at 1:40 pm)Welsh cake Wrote:

(May 15, 2012 at 12:28 am)Godschild Wrote: To live an amazing life for Christ.

I'd ask for a refund.

The way you talk about your life, it sounds as if you did and it was granted.

(May 15, 2012 at 3:01 pm)Aiza Wrote:

(May 15, 2012 at 7:11 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: Out of curiosity, how do you define "baby"?

A very young human.

But like I said, its murdering anyone which is contrary to love.

Ahh, so sending poeple straight to heaven is contrary to love. Letting them go to hell is not. Yes, it is all very clear now.

---

(May 15, 2012 at 3:02 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(May 15, 2012 at 1:40 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: I'd ask for a refund.

The way you talk about your life, it sounds as if you did and it was granted.

What's there to refund? Only a life that is irredeemably worthless would have squandered itself grasping so pitious at the apparition of some executed malcontent from a savagely sectarian corner of a barbarious world.

(May 15, 2012 at 11:00 am)ChadWooters Wrote:

(May 15, 2012 at 10:25 am)gringoperry Wrote: Those chapters [Job 38,39] do not answer my question. Basically God says "I do everything, so don't question me."

Maybe the problem is not with the answer, but with your question. Through Job, God reminds us that His knowledge goes far beyond and His concerns are deeper than we could ever imagine. What seems like injustice from the point of view of a single person at a particular point in time may not be so in reality.

I'm done with this debate. I've seen nothing but creative, yet uninspiring sidestepping of my points. inb4 "I'm sorry that you choose to ignore God's message, in place of your own ignorance". I'm sorry that I've heard it all before, and not one bit of it makes a shred of sense, or presents anywhere near a compelling argument for the existence of the Christian God. Call me stupid, if you will, but I'm pretty sure we'd have been on the same short bus at school. The only difference is, you can’t admit that you don’t know anything beyond what you’ve been told.