Question for freethinkers

[The Grand Nudger]

hate to be a downer but if by kids you mean, say a 3 year old, and they get hurt while running with scissors, yes...you are to blame. Probably a bad analogy. Situations like the one you described are why we have the word "neglect", a word which comes with legal and moral implications. Are you insinuating that god is possibly neglectful but not responsible for the consequences of said neglect?

[tackattack]

Guess that depends on whether you consider yourself a child. It's not a bad analogy, I transitioned it to adults. I'm saying if you're responsible enough to know not to run with scissors then you're responsible enough for personal accountability for your actions. Yet some people still need either the crutch God or the scapegoat God. I don't find either of thos roles suitable to teh God I find in the Bible.

[Epimethean]

Is personal accountability a simple line which, once crossed, indicates full readiness for the vicissitudes of life? I see it as a growing thing which evolves through experience, and I don't feel that a text can grant that experience. How can god be experienced by an unbeliever?

[fr0d0]

I just kudos'd you for 'vicissitudes' Epi. Good word!

[The Grand Nudger]

Would it be correct to consider ourselves as anything more than infants or children in the presence of almighty god?

[diffidus]

@diffidus-

Then you claim God is immoral because he doesn't allow us to face the consequences of our actions. The scenario you posed as God being powerful but losing to "evil" sometimes would theoretically be possible. I don't think it is the God I understand and know, but it's possible. Here's my response to your P.O.E..
People knew it was just a matter of time before something bad happened. People still refused to leave there, thus denial of the risk.
People knew that putting a school that close to the mine could invite disaster. Failure to create safety even though similar things have happened.
Land near a mine is cheap for a reason and I'm sure it was easier to build a school there. Cutting corners and greed are not good ethical practice.

Above are just 3 ways that they denied what was morally and ethically right (even from an outsider). Denial of what is right is rejection of the laws God places on each of our hearts.
Therefore denial of what is right is a denial of God adn the Holy Spirit. That saperates you from God. Rejecting God's love does not make him less all loving, it just keeps you out of his good graces. I would say if any supernatural entity had a say in what went on here (I would say none) it was Satan. Satan is the moral opposite of God, yet you still blame God for allowing this to happen?
The victims didn't. I've shown where they've rejected commone sense, societal rightness and by default God's plan.

Let me ask you something . If I tell my kids to not run with scissors. They run with scissors and get hurt am I to blame? Perhaps for not watching over them closely enough, but certainly not the majority. Now what if my kids have grown up and are 20 and the do the same thing? I don't think anyone would put any blame on me for that. I don't think people who have heard the message of God as many times as people in today's society have, can be considered children with little knowledge and understanding to be watched and coddled over.

I like your analogy of your children with the scissors but you have not quite framed it correctly. Suppose you told your children not to run with scissors and then you see them running with scissors. Do you not stop them immediately to prevent them from harm. You would do it, because you could. You would not sit by idly watching and waiting for them to get hurt. Could you imagine, after the lacerating injury, sitting calmly and saying to yourself - 'well they should have known better - everything has consequences'. And that's the whole point really, namely, that if you could avert the incident, you would, independent of any blame or any percieved natural justice - it is simply this: you love your children and you will protect them from harm under any circumstances as far as you are able - so why doesn't God do the same for His children?

[Epimethean]

Because that god likes a little bit of "you'll poke your eye out with those."

[The Grand Nudger]

This, by the way, is what atheists are hinting at with what theists keep framing as the "god is not fair" complaint. Is it beyond reasonable to ask that the source of absolute moral authority display a sense of moral justice that is, at the very least, as well developed as it's creations?

[jason56]

This is a question for atheists, deists and such. If you were to be asked what is God like and why in case he existed what would you say? The answer should be based on your observation and reflection of everything that has surounded you. Also try to look into your emotions. Thanks

My emotion would be anger. Then I'd try to understand why people would invent Gods.

Then I'd be slightly less angry and much more patronising.

Then I'd watch the news and get angry again.

[tackattack]

Is personal accountability a simple line which, once crossed, indicates full readiness for the vicissitudes of life? I see it as a growing thing which evolves through experience, and I don't feel that a text can grant that experience. How can god be experienced by an unbeliever?

Ok an originating point that grows.. I'm fine with that. I'm not following where your "text can grant that experience" fits into the conversation, but perhaps I missed it from an older post. To answer your question "How can god be experienced by an unbeliever?" I would say:
Pride is definately an obstacle, the Bible talks about it at length and almost every prayer, request, please that I can find is done from humility. Some will have to see to believe (as in John 20:26-29) but some intuit with more than their 5 material senses that there is a God. Seeking to define what that is, is a good starting step to further experiences. Seeking or thirsting for knowledge of him is a step in the right direction.

@Rhythm
No I don't think that would be correct. There is a common Christian train of thought, that emotionally and intellectually new believers who have received Christ are like infants in their understanding. The Bible encourages thirsting for knowledge and developing into an adult mindset and getting nurtured from more substantial information rather than "spiritual milk". It at no time eschews one from personal accountabiliy which, for me, is a major signifier of maturity.
@Rythm (second post)- I still see a lack of sound thought that produces a source of absolute moral authority displaying a sense of moral justice that isn't as well developed as it's creations.

---

I like your analogy of your children with the scissors but you have not quite framed it correctly. Suppose you told your children not to run with scissors and then you see them running with scissors. Do you not stop them immediately to prevent them from harm. You would do it, because you could. You would not sit by idly watching and waiting for them to get hurt. Could you imagine, after the lacerating injury, sitting calmly and saying to yourself - 'well they should have known better - everything has consequences'. And that's the whole point really, namely, that if you could avert the incident, you would, independent of any blame or any percieved natural justice - it is simply this: you love your children and you will protect them from harm under any circumstances as far as you are able - so why doesn't God do the same for His children?

---

Glad you like it. If my son wanted to do whatever he liked and I bailed him out over and over he'd just learn that daddy takes care of everything for him. It's the exact opposite of teaching responsibility and the difference between right and wrong. I do love my children , but I won't protect them from all harm under any circumstance, that would be and irresponsible parent in my eyes. I see God lettting people suffer the consequences of their actions/ stupidity in the same vein.