Do theists sort of think that belieiving in god makes god real?

[Learner]

God is not steering these forces.

Assuming god exists, what the fuck was he thinking when he created them? Wise beyond our comprehension? I think not, unless of course he turns out not to be the loving and just creator of the universe Christians keep alleging he is.

What was He thinking? I couldn't say apart from what is said in the bibllcal texts.

 

[James Brown]

However, when is about God, I understand that if I'm going to believe that He does exists and that He made us, then I have no other choice but trying to understand the rules given by Him.

Why????

Stockholm Syndrome?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I can interpret the phrase from above in layman language, having God saying: "Who the hell you think you are? I made you, do you understand? So if I destroy you because I want to destroy you, can you stop me? Are you dumb? If millions die because calamities, who are you to judge me? I destroy to whoever I want to destroy and I bless to whoever I want to bless..." and crap like that... "holly crap", of course.

He can do it, and we are just the potter's clay and the framed thing... so, why you waste your life complaining?

I'm not wasting my life complaining. Outside the posts I make on the subject on this forum, I don't give either God or religion more than one or two passing thoughts each year. The subject matter is irrelevant to my life as a whole.

Also, nobody is disputing the claim that, if God exists, he can destroy whomever he wants for whatever reason he wants and there's really nothing anyone can do about it. The question is why he would do that. If he is a benevolent individual, as is claimed by Christians, then what is his rationale for harming people who, as far as can be seen, have done nothing to merit it?

You're correct that we don't know that everyone in history who has ever been killed by a natural disaster weren't secretly evil and deserved execution for their sins, but there's no reason to assume that this is the case. If God is intervening in the world on a daily basis to kill off those who deserve to die, then wouldn't we find a higher correlation between tornado victims and child molesters and the like, as opposed to that not seeming to be the case at all?

I ask myself the same question sometimes.

Even more. I see fathers taking care of their children even when they become adults. Always on their side, helping them and being sure that the children are succeeding in life.

I might ask why God doesn't do the same with his children.

I completely understand your point, I'm not blind and won't pretend to never have asked challenging questions against the position of God in several things.

However, when is about God, I understand that if I'm going to believe that He does exists and that He made us, then I have no other choice but trying to understand the rules given by Him.

Here in America, respect for father and mother was the most essential value up to the 50's. The generation of the 60's changed it. In the 70's ignored it. But other cultures still keeping this value and they do respect their parents over lots of things in their lives.

According to the bible, God was using the prophet to make the Israelite to understand and leave idolatry away. God used an example. The prophet told of a family between the Israelite, where the father told their children to never ever drink a sole drop of wine.

The sons never questioned the reason why their father made such an order. The sons obeyed the father. God used that example and said that because those sons obeyed their father to do something that the same God didn't order, but the sons did it because their respect towards their father, God said that the name of that family won't be extinguished throughout generations.

Using this example, God was asking the Israelite to do the same, to obey Him like the sons did towards their father in that family.

Then, believing that God exists is also understanding that He deserves respect.

I'm not the right candidate to encourage others to show respect towards God because I truly am not a saint and less a religious person praying and doing things religious people do. But, the same as a criminal in jail will tell you -if you ask-, that committing crimes is bad, I can say the same, that disrespecting God is not a good idea.

This is what my answers in these topics are based on. Like you, I question a lot about God, however, I try to maintain a line as a border and try not to cross it... and I fail lots of times, but I still keep trying not to...

And hence, the entire point of atheism. If you need to go through that level of cognitive dissonance in order to hold a position, it's time for a new position.

If somebody tells you that the way to get rich is to go to the end of a rainbow and pick up the pot of gold a leprechaun put there but the end of the rainbow just keeps moving and acting in ways which conform to how all the aleprechanists say that it's just a refraction of light centered on each individual's eyeball, you may want to reassess and book an appointment with a financial advisor instead of driving around all day trying to get to the end of one.

Similarly, if your conception of God appears to be at direct odds with observable reality and you have to go through an Olympic sized set of mental gymnastics in order to square the two and then still remain unsatisfied then you may want to reassess and admit that your conception of God is a flawed one.

Also, why would God care if we disrespect him? If the guy is omnipotent, there's no rationale for him to have a fragile ego and start to whine and complain when some insect is underwhelmed by His Glory. It makes sense if he's a fictional construct invented by primitive societies in order to validate their dominance of others through fear and intimidation, but if God is supposed to be superior than a dictator who lived in a leaky mud hut, then I'd expect better from him.

 

[Jason the Rationalist]

I think that if one of the god(s) that is believed in actually exists that it needs its creation more than its creation needs it. Why bring everything into existence otherwise? Believers may be comfortable with - and seek comfort in - placing this entity on a pedestal (regardless of its post-creation behaviour) but presumably it had the power, and option, to just not bother with it all. After all, as far as belief in it goes, it is extremely unlikely that there will ever be a point in time that all the non-believers will believe he/she/it exists. Being omni-everything it will surely have forseen this. It seems to have left it to people who are not very convincing to keep coming up with arguments which are invariably full of problems, excuses and assumptions. If it brought everything into existence for any selfish or self-centred reason then the problem exists that it has the characteristics of its imperfect creation.

 

[humbleman]

I ask myself the same question sometimes.

Even more. I see fathers taking care of their children even when they become adults. Always on their side, helping them and being sure that the children are succeeding in life.

I might ask why God doesn't do the same with his children.

I completely understand your point, I'm not blind and won't pretend to never have asked challenging questions against the position of God in several things.

However, when is about God, I understand that if I'm going to believe that He does exists and that He made us, then I have no other choice but trying to understand the rules given by Him.

Here in America, respect for father and mother was the most essential value up to the 50's. The generation of the 60's changed it. In the 70's ignored it. But other cultures still keeping this value and they do respect their parents over lots of things in their lives.

According to the bible, God was using the prophet to make the Israelite to understand and leave idolatry away. God used an example. The prophet told of a family between the Israelite, where the father told their children to never ever drink a sole drop of wine.

The sons never questioned the reason why their father made such an order. The sons obeyed the father. God used that example and said that because those sons obeyed their father to do something that the same God didn't order, but the sons did it because their respect towards their father, God said that the name of that family won't be extinguished throughout generations.

Using this example, God was asking the Israelite to do the same, to obey Him like the sons did towards their father in that family.

Then, believing that God exists is also understanding that He deserves respect.

I'm not the right candidate to encourage others to show respect towards God because I truly am not a saint and less a religious person praying and doing things religious people do. But, the same as a criminal in jail will tell you -if you ask-, that committing crimes is bad, I can say the same, that disrespecting God is not a good idea.

This is what my answers in these topics are based on. Like you, I question a lot about God, however, I try to maintain a line as a border and try not to cross it... and I fail lots of times, but I still keep trying not to...

And hence, the entire point of atheism. If you need to go through that level of cognitive dissonance in order to hold a position, it's time for a new position.

If somebody tells you that the way to get rich is to go to the end of a rainbow and pick up the pot of gold a leprechaun put there but the end of the rainbow just keeps moving and acting in ways which conform to how all the aleprechanists say that it's just a refraction of light centered on each individual's eyeball, you may want to reassess and book an appointment with a financial advisor instead of driving around all day trying to get to the end of one.

Similarly, if your conception of God appears to be at direct odds with observable reality and you have to go through an Olympic sized set of mental gymnastics in order to square the two and then still remain unsatisfied then you may want to reassess and admit that your conception of God is a flawed one.

Also, why would God care if we disrespect him? If the guy is omnipotent, there's no rationale for him to have a fragile ego and start to whine and complain when some insect is underwhelmed by His Glory. It makes sense if he's a fictional construct invented by primitive societies in order to validate their dominance of others through fear and intimidation, but if God is supposed to be superior than a dictator who lived in a leaky mud hut, then I'd expect better from him.

First your argument was that God -if a god exists- has no "compassion", that He doesn't care.

Later, when I write my point of God asking for retracting of wrong doings and go back to His side, even giving an example with the sons of a family respecting their father and how God rewards such a behavior, and so forth, now you come with your new "position": "Why God cares?"

Are you playing a double standard with your thoughts?

 

[Jason the Rationalist]

What a bizarre post. Going to his side, but he's all powerful isn't he?....and yet he needs your assistance? Or is it that you need his? The issue of respect - if my father behaved in the way that your god apparently did/does, well I would find it absolutely impossible to respect him. Fear him - possibly. Hate him - possibly. Feel that I didn't have a role model in him - quite probably. I'm not sure its as simple as saying that he has compassion or lacks it - its the mixed messages that rely on believers to shape into something more acceptable or at least understandable. Its almost as if your god doesn't exist and was, oh I don't know, let's say for sake of argument a figment of imagination made large and somehow likely through limited comprehension of the natural world.

 

[humbleman]

I ask myself the same question sometimes.

Even more. I see fathers taking care of their children even when they become adults. Always on their side, helping them and being sure that the children are succeeding in life.

I might ask why God doesn't do the same with his children.

I completely understand your point, I'm not blind and won't pretend to never have asked challenging questions against the position of God in several things.

However, when is about God, I understand that if I'm going to believe that He does exists and that He made us, then I have no other choice but trying to understand the rules given by Him.

Here in America, respect for father and mother was the most essential value up to the 50's. The generation of the 60's changed it. In the 70's ignored it. But other cultures still keeping this value and they do respect their parents over lots of things in their lives.

According to the bible, God was using the prophet to make the Israelite to understand and leave idolatry away. God used an example. The prophet told of a family between the Israelite, where the father told their children to never ever drink a sole drop of wine.

The sons never questioned the reason why their father made such an order. The sons obeyed the father. God used that example and said that because those sons obeyed their father to do something that the same God didn't order, but the sons did it because their respect towards their father, God said that the name of that family won't be extinguished throughout generations.

Using this example, God was asking the Israelite to do the same, to obey Him like the sons did towards their father in that family.

Then, believing that God exists is also understanding that He deserves respect.

I'm not the right candidate to encourage others to show respect towards God because I truly am not a saint and less a religious person praying and doing things religious people do. But, the same as a criminal in jail will tell you -if you ask-, that committing crimes is bad, I can say the same, that disrespecting God is not a good idea.

This is what my answers in these topics are based on. Like you, I question a lot about God, however, I try to maintain a line as a border and try not to cross it... and I fail lots of times, but I still keep trying not to...

This encapsulates quite well the arguments for having difficulty understanding why people would or should believe or worship such an entity. Rules are set for people to follow but its a case of "do as I say, not necessarily as I do" which is pretty hypocritical. Its accompanied with "I'm not perfect, I make mistakes" - yes, we can say that everyone is imperfect, everyone makes mistakes, but I just don't see the point of worshipping an entity that I would say does not deserve to be believed in/worshipped. To me it would amount to worshipping a schizophrenic psychopath where one half is love, the other is destruction. You wouldn't know what was coming next. Can't see how this represents a good life lesson in terms of who/what to look up to. Quite why someone would wish to be guided by this is a mystery to me.

The people who believe it struggle to comprehend and/or explain certain aspects to the people who don't believe it, and the people who don't believe it struggle to comprehend what it is that the belivers believe and quite why they do.

Sure... right...

You will compare the wise laws accredited to God with whatever a schizophrenic psychopath might say.

Apparently your reasonable thoughts have escaped from your brain.

 

[Jason the Rationalist]

I ask myself the same question sometimes.

Even more. I see fathers taking care of their children even when they become adults. Always on their side, helping them and being sure that the children are succeeding in life.

I might ask why God doesn't do the same with his children.

I completely understand your point, I'm not blind and won't pretend to never have asked challenging questions against the position of God in several things.

However, when is about God, I understand that if I'm going to believe that He does exists and that He made us, then I have no other choice but trying to understand the rules given by Him.

Here in America, respect for father and mother was the most essential value up to the 50's. The generation of the 60's changed it. In the 70's ignored it. But other cultures still keeping this value and they do respect their parents over lots of things in their lives.

According to the bible, God was using the prophet to make the Israelite to understand and leave idolatry away. God used an example. The prophet told of a family between the Israelite, where the father told their children to never ever drink a sole drop of wine.

The sons never questioned the reason why their father made such an order. The sons obeyed the father. God used that example and said that because those sons obeyed their father to do something that the same God didn't order, but the sons did it because their respect towards their father, God said that the name of that family won't be extinguished throughout generations.

Using this example, God was asking the Israelite to do the same, to obey Him like the sons did towards their father in that family.

Then, believing that God exists is also understanding that He deserves respect.

I'm not the right candidate to encourage others to show respect towards God because I truly am not a saint and less a religious person praying and doing things religious people do. But, the same as a criminal in jail will tell you -if you ask-, that committing crimes is bad, I can say the same, that disrespecting God is not a good idea.

This is what my answers in these topics are based on. Like you, I question a lot about God, however, I try to maintain a line as a border and try not to cross it... and I fail lots of times, but I still keep trying not to...

This encapsulates quite well the arguments for having difficulty understanding why people would or should believe or worship such an entity. Rules are set for people to follow but its a case of "do as I say, not necessarily as I do" which is pretty hypocritical. Its accompanied with "I'm not perfect, I make mistakes" - yes, we can say that everyone is imperfect, everyone makes mistakes, but I just don't see the point of worshipping an entity that I would say does not deserve to be believed in/worshipped. To me it would amount to worshipping a schizophrenic psychopath where one half is love, the other is destruction. You wouldn't know what was coming next. Can't see how this represents a good life lesson in terms of who/what to look up to. Quite why someone would wish to be guided by this is a mystery to me.

The people who believe it struggle to comprehend and/or explain certain aspects to the people who don't believe it, and the people who don't believe it struggle to comprehend what it is that the belivers believe and quite why they do.

Sure... right...

You will compare the wise laws accredited to God with whatever a schizophrenic psychopath might say.

Apparently your reasonable thoughts have escaped from your brain.

That wasn't exactly what I was getting at but sure, why not? All part of your god's creation so are you going to speak on its behalf - I don't hear it saying a whole lot (but then I don't hear voices in my head) - and explain how/why its invalid?

 

[humbleman]

Sure... right...

You will compare the wise laws accredited to God with whatever a schizophrenic psychopath might say.

Apparently your reasonable thoughts have escaped from your brain.

That wasn't exactly what I was getting at but sure, why not? All part of your god's creation so are you going to speak on its behalf - I don't hear it saying a whole lot (but then I don't hear voices in my head) - and explain how/why its invalid?

You better ask that question to Angry Flof, he seems to be an expert about species setting right their antennas....

 

[Hermit]

The sons never questioned the reason why their father made such an order. The sons obeyed the father.

You make unquestioning obedience sound like a good thing. To me it's not, and no, we have no evidence that our relationship with some alleged god-thingy of infinite, to us incomprehensible, wisdom is analogous to the relationship with our fathers.

Not that this god-thingy's commands are necessarily motivated by his infinite wisdom in the first place.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVoloVvsupM[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Hermit]

God is not steering these forces.

Assuming god exists, what the fuck was he thinking when he created them? Wise beyond our comprehension? I think not, unless of course he turns out not to be the loving and just creator of the universe Christians keep alleging he is.

What was He thinking? I couldn't say apart from what is said in the bibllcal texts.

Great. Some allegedly wise and intelligent supernatural being creates a catastrophic environment for us that indiscriminately kills a quarter of a million people in a matter of a couple of hours, and you metaphorically throw your hands up in the air, basically implying that he works in mysterious ways. If you insist on believing in such a monster, could you not at least give him a heartfelt "Fuck you too" for that?

 

[braces_for_impact]

What was He thinking? I couldn't say apart from what is said in the bibllcal texts.

Great. Some allegedly wise and intelligent supernatural being creates a catastrophic environment for us that indiscriminately kills a quarter of a million people in a matter of a couple of hours, and you metaphorically throw your hands up in the air, basically implying that he works in mysterious ways. If you insist on believing in such a monster, could you not at least give him a heartfelt "Fuck you too" for that?

I have always found it interesting on how God's followers suddenly become profoundly incurious in such situations.

 

[Learner]

You's got me on that one. Never thought about that all of this time .... I ...I never...Hmm.

Ok where do I sign?

 

[Learner]

What was He thinking? I couldn't say apart from what is said in the bibllcal texts.

Great. Some allegedly wise and intelligent supernatural being creates a catastrophic environment for us that indiscriminately kills a quarter of a million people in a matter of a couple of hours, and you metaphorically throw your hands up in the air, basically implying that he works in mysterious ways. If you insist on believing in such a monster, could you not at least give him a heartfelt "Fuck you too" for that?

I have always found it interesting on how God's followers suddenly become profoundly incurious in such situations.

As I said as according to scripture God is not directly intervening as God did back then. In Genesis it shows and explains HE was "regretful" when Man was created after man began doing evil things, turning his back on God for lesser entities etc... The earth was "originally" the garden paradise. The rest you know of - Adam and sin and so forth.

The question really ...I would have thought myself is: Would God (When HE intervenes) rectify the variety of catastrophies in its forms from natural-forces to man. The scripture says "YES". A new Heaven and earth - without the catastrophies no memories of pain or sorrow!

 

[braces_for_impact]

I have always found it interesting on how God's followers suddenly become profoundly incurious in such situations.

As I said as according imo to scripture God is not directly intervening as God did back then. In Genesis it shows and explains HE was regretful when Man was created after man began doing evil things, turning his back on God for lesser entities. The earth was "originally" the garden paradise. The rest you know of - Adam and sin and so forth.

The question really ...I would have thought myself is: Would God (When HE intervenes) rectify the variety of catastrophies in its forms from natural-forces to man. The scripture says "YES". A new Heaven and earth - without the catastrophies!

As I indicated, it appears to me that you have suddenly become profoundly incurious. I think in some ways believers have been this way for so long they fail to see it. There was a time when I was so. So, a (not so obvious) question from a non-believer then. Great, so God will one day create a utopia, or it awaits his loyal followers or whatever the specifics of what you happen to believe. What about in the meantime? Look at all this suffering around us! Do the ends suddenly justify the means? If I later provide a utopia, does that excuse the BILLIONS that had to suffer throughout history to reach that point? Does my moral culpability disappear if those that suffered no longer do so? Do I have a responsibility to lessen such suffering whenever possible?

It's even worse when put into it's proper context. Everyone suffers to one degree or another. Some horribly, some can bear it, some can not. Yet, the utopia is not apparent to anyone until after death. There isn't even proof that utopia awaits, but one has to take someone else's word for it. Even more awry, people have mutually exclusive descriptions of this utopia and what one must do to assure their place in it. This is increasingly critical, because many of the descriptions of this utopia require humans to say and do things that cause us harm and suffering for ourselves and others in this life, before the claimed utopia is reached, and that is easily demonstrable when this utopia is not. Step outside your religion for a minute and try to look at it from an outsider's point of view. Because, you better kiss Hank's ass, or no million dollars for you.

 

[Learner]

As I indicated, it appears to me that you have suddenly become profoundly incurious. I think in some ways believers have been this way for so long they fail to see it. There was a time when I was so. So, a (not so obvious) question from a non-believer then. Great, so God will one day create a utopia, or it awaits his loyal followers or whatever the specifics of what you happen to believe. What about in the meantime? Look at all this suffering around us! Do the ends suddenly justify the means? If I later provide a utopia, does that excuse the BILLIONS that had to suffer throughout history to reach that point? Does my moral culpability disappear if those that suffered no longer do so? Do I have a responsibility to lessen such suffering whenever possible?

Well to put it as I am limited to in phrasing: ...the before-time we had that "assistance" so to speak or guided in which we had guidlines and then laws. Covenants were made and then more made after continously breaking ...to the point we are now on our own and in the mean-time we are STILL here remarkably with the ability to survive without that assistance.

The contradictictions you seem to be looking for obviously are naturalist , physical observation understanding of the world.

Theres no anger there,when the world is believed to have always been that way ..an acceptance of the nature. But there are (rightly) those who complain about others having more than others unfairly. Just as one can point out who their enemies (in their minds) are and suddenly at ease ,create wars with them ...even over little meaningless things.

"Do I have a responsibility to lessen such suffering whenever possible?" Do you think its possible in unison ...everyone that is, since there is no God about?

Logically thats what it takes!

It's even worse when put into it's proper context. Everyone suffers to one degree or another. Some horribly, some can bear it, some can not. Yet, the utopia is not apparent to anyone until after death. There isn't even proof that utopia awaits, but one has to take someone else's word for it. Even more awry, people have mutually exclusive descriptions of this utopia and what one must do to assure their place in it. This is increasingly critical, because many of the descriptions of this utopia require humans to say and do things that cause us harm and suffering for ourselves and others in this life, before the claimed utopia is reached, and that is easily demonstrable when this utopia is not. Step outside your religion for a minute and try to look at it from an outsider's point of view. Because, you better kiss Hank's ass, or no million dollars for you.

Well yes the context is about faith. Some of the arguments were from naturalistic perspectives using the contradictionary notion of the bible as you would comparing to the understanding of observable nature and natural. However the bible does NOT contradict itself (often the claim) which is the context I used in the replies.

 

[Jason the Rationalist]

The matter of whether or not there are Biblical contradictions could be regarded as an impasse, in a way it is similar to the problem of any posited god's existence. Believers will be comfortable, almost reassured, by the difficulties non-believers highlight with the material as it is used as something to "rebel" against. The problem I have is that I don't think believers are always honest about how they feel inside about what they verbally support, ie. coming out with something like "I find this part of Genesis extremely difficult to accept". Anything, and I mean anything that forces adherents to believe and follow regardless of any difficulties they may have (which includes verbalising that they believe all of it regardless of what they actually think about it), a healthy mind should continue to question WHY it is being asked to just accept these things.

Something else to mention: if interpretation of religious text changes through time this is not the same thing as scientific understanding changing through time.

 

[Learner]

The matter of whether or not there are Biblical contradictions could be regarded as an impasse, in a way it is similar to the problem of any posited god's existence. Believers will be comfortable, almost reassured, by the difficulties non-believers highlight with the material as it is used as something to "rebel" against. The problem I have is that I don't think believers are always honest about how they feel inside about what they verbally support, ie. coming out with something like "I find this part of Genesis extremely difficult to accept". Anything, and I mean anything that forces adherents to believe and follow regardless of any difficulties they may have (which includes verbalising that they believe all of it regardless of what they actually think about it), a healthy mind should continue to question WHY it is being asked to just accept these things.

Well I used to argue against Christians and I would go right to Genesis and try to see what those issues regarding Genesis were, when Atheists used to point out. The theists always replied from the language of pure faith i.e. ways from their personal experience which is very hard to prove if at all by certain criteria!

I found a little dishonesty in some of the arguments which admittedly I also used myself without actually looking at it because I knew they couldn't answer it...at least not in the acceptable manner beside belief alone.

An example (mentioned in old post somewhere) in Exodus... I'll continue in a bit.
(Gotta run before closing time)

 

[ruby sparks]

I have always found it interesting on how God's followers suddenly become profoundly incurious in such situations.

As I said as according to scripture God is not directly intervening as God did back then. In Genesis it shows and explains HE was "regretful" when Man was created after man began doing evil things, turning his back on God for lesser entities etc... The earth was "originally" the garden paradise. The rest you know of - Adam and sin and so forth.

The question really ...I would have thought myself is: Would God (When HE intervenes) rectify the variety of catastrophies in its forms from natural-forces to man. The scripture says "YES". A new Heaven and earth - without the catastrophies no memories of pain or sorrow!

I'm not even sure you can reasonably say that scriptures say god isn't intervening. Even in the NT he is just about to intervene, and what were Jesus' miracles if not interventions either allowed by or coming from god? What you probably mean is that god is, apparently, not intervening nowadays, during your lifetime, and I do wonder if you are consistent in this and never see god as intervening when something good happens. Do you ever say 'thank god' or pray, for example? If so, why pray to a non-intervening god? Even if you don't, it's extremely common, so your response here that bad things (unrelated to human responsibility) happen because god isn't in an 'intervening phase' seems at the very least to be somewhat unusual.

I hope you can at least appreciate why it doesn't seem like a convincing response to atheists, who, not entirely unreasonably, think that you are essentially rationalising something that you simply already believe in, namely a loving god, even though there is a great deal, perhaps especially in the scriptures, to contradict that, for those not so inclined to overlook the obvious contradictions. There is not so much of a contradiction when it comes to most modern christians that I have met, who by and large seem to be a decent bunch, with exceptions. But that's true of atheists too. Or almost any designated group.

This is not about trying to make you an atheist, or deprive any believer of the comfort of believing in a loving god. Well, maybe it is, maybe some of us secretly want to sway you, or would at least like you to be swayed. But ultimately, if you're not swayed, that's fine. As I said, a loving god is imo a beautiful idea. I wish there was one. But as you yourself might agree, the world seems to operate as if there wasn't one. You believe god is merely not intervening these days. For some reason that you might struggle to explain. Though ultimately you could explain it, because you are likely going to give the god you believe in the benefit of the doubt.

At least you're not trying to claim that 'god-approved' massacres in the OT were about preventing outbreaks of infection, so kudos for that.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I have always found it interesting on how God's followers suddenly become profoundly incurious in such situations.

As I said as according to scripture God is not directly intervening as God did back then. In Genesis it shows and explains HE was "regretful" when Man was created after man began doing evil things, turning his back on God for lesser entities etc... The earth was "originally" the garden paradise. The rest you know of - Adam and sin and so forth.

The question really ...I would have thought myself is: Would God (When HE intervenes) rectify the variety of catastrophies in its forms from natural-forces to man. The scripture says "YES". A new Heaven and earth - without the catastrophies no memories of pain or sorrow!

I'm not even sure you can reasonably say that scriptures say god isn't intervening. Even in the NT he is just about to intervene, and what were Jesus' miracles if not interventions either allowed by or coming from god? What you probably mean is that god is, apparently, not intervening nowadays, during your lifetime, and I do wonder if you are consistent in this and never see god as intervening when something good happens. Do you ever say 'thank god' or pray, for example? If so, why pray to a non-intervening god? Even if you don't, it's extremely common, so your response here that bad things (unrelated to human responsibility) happen because god isn't in an 'intervening phase' seems at the very least to be somewhat unusual.

How is that unusual? If I claim to have a god I can make it be whatever I want. When at any time has that not been the case?