(December 11, 2013 at 11:22 pm)Ryantology Wrote:(December 11, 2013 at 9:34 pm)GodsRevolt Wrote: So, if someone allowed you to suffer knowing that you would come out the other side a better person, would that justified? or evil? As a parent, I did this thing called "tummy time" with my babies when they were first born. You lay the child on the ground and the child gets a chance to work out muscles that will later help him/her to sit-up on their own and swallow. It is not the most pleasant time for the child and they mostly ended in crying out.
The baby would mostly likely be fine without "tummy time", i mean, I could have avoided the crying out if I had skipped it for my little ones, but they were able to start doing other things earlier because of it.
I think it's kind of reaching for an example when it's like this. Would you put your child through that if it wasn't necessary and/or had no benefit?
This is my point. Not to mention that the baby had no idea that it was beneficial, nor did she condone it. As the father, I came from the position of knowledge and authority. I could see the end goal and weigh it against the suffering. My child couldn't.
Quote:If a human being attempted to improve the moral fiber of other people by intentionally starving a child to death, we'd call them a criminal. Why does God get a pass?
Because God, as the Father, comes from a position of knowledge and authority. He sees the end goal.
". . . let the atheists themselves choose a god. They will find only one divinity who ever uttered their isolation; only one religion in which God seemed for an instant to be an atheist." -G. K. Chesterton
