Loaded question

[Smidlee]

Did they forgive you?

Yes and my Heavenly Father even more so.

 

[TheBear]

Why do bad things happen to good people?

For the same reason good things happen to bad people; life is....

 

[Oafman]

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Why would they not?

 

[quatona]

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Why does that even surprise anyone? Why would you expect otherwise? Why does it need an explanation?
As for the load in the question: Yes - equivocation is lurking in the use of the dichotomy "good-bad" here.

 

[TerranceL]

Bad things happen to everyone and who is and isn't "good" is subjective.

 

[ananda]

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Be careful when answering this question. It's a minefield by the way.

I would like to hear your reasoning.

Of all the explanations I've heard, the most satisfying one to me is this: past kamma. Unwholesome deeds, thoughts, and intentions from the past will eventually sprout as bad circumstances in one's life - whether or not the future self who experiences those circumstances is "bad" or "good". Current choices (kamma) will also eventually sprout in the future in some way, shape, and form.

We live in a world and universe governed by an unmistakeable law: that of cause and effect. When appropriate events combine together to produce a seed (of any sort), and that seed is planted and nurtured, and appropriate supporting circumstances appear, that seed will undoubtedly sprout.

 

[Winken]

You get it right.

Now to your question: it insinuates that we were created to fail. We weren't. We failed by our own choice or the choice of the first created couple. We are just living the consequences. Not God's fault but ours. God is good and just. We are fallen and corrupted.

He didn't create a set of rules that we can't live up to. He create them to show the abundance of grace and love, not to challenge.

Remember Christ lived on the earth exactly to show us that.

Thank you, Davinc.

 

[Winken]

The fact remains that God could have created a system where the son does not pay for the sins of the father.

He didn't..........and your analogy doesn't fit.

Isn't the entire point of Jesus that the rules God made are impossible for any normal human to follow?

There are no rules for you, Cadet. It is all Grace. Romans 10:8-13.

 

[Winken]

Of all the explanations I've heard, the most satisfying one to me is this: past kamma.

Just change "kamma" to sin.

 

[TillICollapse]

Probabilities.

 

[Davinci1804]

That's a phenomenally convenient excuse. The fact remains that God could have created a system where the son does not pay for the sins of the father. That in particular is a bit of a sticking point for me - that the decision made by a couple that I will never know and that I have no influence over somehow sticks to me seems like the epitome of a flawed moral system. Why make a system in which a large portion of the beings you love end up in hell, when you could just as easily, you know, not send them there.

Let me make an analogy. If I put a baby on the edge of a cliff and stop paying attention to it for a while, I do not get to be mad when the baby crawls off and accidentally falls off and dies. I put a baby on a cliff, what did you think was going to happen? But to make this analogous to the genesis account, there would also have to be a sociopath there who gets off on babies falling off cliffs trying to convince the little bugger to jump. One who I also put there. And then I punish that baby's family.

None of this adds up to a supreme being who is all-powerful and loves us. It adds up to a demented sociopath with a hankering for some toasted human. If we weren't created to fail, then God is horribly incompetent. I never failed in the garden, and those who did fail in the garden had no understanding of good and evil so they had no way to know that what they were doing was wrong! That's a system where we never really had a chance to begin with.



If I posted a picture of Scarlett Johansson topless, rest assured you'd see how futile your task is. After all, merely looking at a woman with lust is a sin. Hell, we are born in sin. Isn't the entire point of Jesus that the rules God made are impossible for any normal human to follow?



You know what would show more grace and love? Not creating a system which requires a by-proxy atonement for one's sins. Not creating a system where anyone needs to be tortured forever. Here, let me show you a system with more grace and love:

Humans come onto this earth. They live simple, mostly happy lives, because their needs are taken care of and they don't have a psychological urge to downgrade their own status and constantly yearn for more (we still have free will, we just don't have this one obnoxious psychological quirk) and then they die and get to start over. Also, God acts an awful lot like, say, Luna from Friendship is Magic, showing up in nightmares to ensure that the people he is in charge of know he's around and looking out for their wellbeing.

See, notice anything about that system? It involves humans being happy, actually having a personal relationship with god, and no eternal torment. Humans still have free will (and in fact, we would still have free will even if we weren't able to choose to do evil!). I came up with that system in like 5 minutes after a My Little Pony binge. I'm sure an omnipotent, omnibenevolent ruler of the universe could do better.

I'm sorry to tell you that you get it all confused. A system where the son does not pay the sin of the father is a system without inheritance, that is, you wouldn't inherit a genetic material from your parents, when they die you would not inherit their wealth, etc...in such system reproduction would be impossible, each subsequent generation would have to be created, no reproduction, no descendants. We have the angel as examples. Only the ones who sin are corrupted. The rest are as sinless as they were created.

Have you seen the movie ex machina? If you haven't i suggest you to. It describes a system where every version of AI that fail the creator standard was destroyed and improved upon. This is the system you describe. A disconnect system. The movie seems immoral and the programmer abusive. I wouldn't call it a morally flawed system. To call it that would be to deny to the programmer the sovereignty over its creation.

To call God's decision as flaw over its creation, it's like denying its sovereignty.

When God made us, he didn't contain us but he liberated and then he set boundaries. We crossed the line, we pay the price. Simple. Nothing morally flawed here. Free will does not mean I can do whatever I want but only allowed to do. Our free is subject to an absolute Will, which is higher than us.

Your analogies are really wrong, it's not like we didn't have choices. If I tell you to jump off a cliff would you? And your friend tell youiif you jump you'll die an horrible death. Who is the sociopath here? I would guess me telling you to jump off. Not your friend warning you. You are free to jump, but also free not to.

What do you know about Grace and love. What you describe is the same thing the trees are doing. I guess you want to be a tree, huh!

We all want a loving God, but we refuse to believe that he is also just that he will punish the sinner. It's like love and justice are mutually exclusive.

 

[ananda]

Just change "kamma" to sin.

Kamma is, however, not judged by a god sitting in judgment.

 

[Davinci1804]

Kamma is, however, not judged by a god sitting in judgment.

You will be surprised!

 

[ananda]

You will be surprised!

Perhaps it is you who will be surprised!

 

[Davinci1804]

Perhaps it is you who will be surprised!

Perhaps, but I have no doubt.

 

[ananda]

Perhaps, but I have no doubt.

That's good. Neither do I.

 

[Davinci1804]

That's good. Neither do I.

We can't both be right so you must be wrong.

 

[ananda]

We can't both be right so you must be wrong.

Nah

 

[Davinci1804]

Nah

Come on woman, it's 1:00 AM! Won't you give up? I'm sleeping here. Lol

 

[ananda]

Come on woman, it's 1:00 AM! Won't you give up? I'm sleeping here. Lol

Well, you got this wrong here - can't you imagine that you could be wrong about your god?