Why did God do this to us?

[relaxeus]

I've heard it explained in this way:

"This is why the Lord stopped the builders: they sought to reach Heaven through their own actions, denying the necessity of God's grace. God wasn't afraid that they'd reach Heaven; if anything, He scattered the people, rendering this failure of an attempt at Heaven impossible, that men might know how to approach Heaven in a way that they might enter it."

Seems reasonable - if you're a Christian willing to admit the Babel story is a parable.

You know, if God really wanted to help us, he would have done something positive instead of something negative. He just made things worse...

 

[knightlight72]

You know, if God really wanted to help us, he would have done something positive instead of something negative. He just made things worse...

As a parent, sometimes we parent figures do things that just don't seem to help. For example, we may oput you in the corner, and say you're not allowed to do that. The child is upset, and doesn't really acceptt aht was all for their best interest. After all, the child really wants to do that action.

As a parent, while I can see the child doesn't really enjoy that i had to put them in the corner, I know I still had to do it. It's a matter doing what is best for them to grow up.

From the view of the child, it's a negative. From the persepctive of the parent, it's a positive. What it comes down to, is that the parent does know and understand the full consequences. The child does not.

 

[relaxeus]

As a parent, sometimes we parent figures do things that just don't seem to help. For example, we may oput you in the corner, and say you're not allowed to do that. The child is upset, and doesn't really acceptt aht was all for their best interest. After all, the child really wants to do that action.

As a parent, while I can see the child doesn't really enjoy that i had to put them in the corner, I know I still had to do it. It's a matter doing what is best for them to grow up.

From the view of the child, it's a negative. From the persepctive of the parent, it's a positive. What it comes down to, is that the parent does know and understand the full consequences. The child does not.

Would you ever kill your child? This is how God, the loving father, has dealt with countless of his children.

 

[knightlight72]

Would you ever kill your child? This is how God, the loving father, has dealt with countless of his children.

Would I? I don't think so, but I am not God who is able to give or take life. Let's not forget this life is very temporary, and God has an eternity with us after this life.

In this case, God knows the consequences of the actions, and is able to have the souls with Him forever.

 

[Moros]

You know, if God really wanted to help us, he would have done something positive instead of something negative. He just made things worse...

Yeah, either that or it just didn't happen. : )

 

[kopilo]

You know, if God really wanted to help us, he would have done something positive instead of something negative. He just made things worse...

Negative and positive are subjective words.

Thing is, the good news can only go so far. The problem is the people in charge are often corrupted and immoral. The good news is ineffective for them and we have a situation in which pain and suffering continues by the hands of these people. The good news alone can't solve our problems. We need God to do more.

I doubt Martin Luther King Jr. would have held the same thoughts as true.

 

[kopilo]

Perhaps in the future we will be advanced enough to create our own dirt . If God can do it, I don't see why no one else could.

That's not the point of the joke. The point is that no matter how many things we can create God gave us the free will to do so.

 

[relaxeus]

That's not the point of the joke. The point is that no matter how many things we can create God gave us the free will to do so.

If thats true, then does that make us his property? I don't think so. Now that we are sentient beings we have to be respected as such and we deserve the same rights as other such beings, even if those beings may have created us. I can build myself a chair and I can say that's mine. That's fair. But if I create a living being then that being should no longer be my property. My child, yes, but that child deserves the same rights as we have.

 

[kopilo]

If thats true, then does that make us his property? I don't think so. Now that we are sentient beings we have to be respected as such and we deserve the same rights as other such beings, even if those beings may have created us. I can build myself a chair and I can say that's mine. That's fair. But if I create a living being then that being should no longer be my property. My child, yes, but that child deserves the same rights as we have.

yeap , but remember the difference between the chair, ourselves and our children is that God is meant to be ominescent (or however it is spelt), which can be another philosophical targent, which I am inept to answer why/how/etc.

 

[Misty Minister]

Specifically regarding human diversity I can see beauty - and a great deal of ugliness, but mainly I see simple inevitability. As the original tribes spread out their languages "forgot" each other and new terms were added for new phenomena. I can sometimes barely understand people from the deep south and far north in my own country.

There is also the loss of 5 of the 10 types of homosapiens who lived before some major catastrophic event . .. a global ice age or something.
Anyway, the genepool used to be more diverse than it is now. I read that in national geographic.

 

[Misty Minister]

If thats true, then does that make us his property? I don't think so. Now that we are sentient beings we have to be respected as such and we deserve the same rights as other such beings, even if those beings may have created us. I can build myself a chair and I can say that's mine. That's fair. But if I create a living being then that being should no longer be my property. My child, yes, but that child deserves the same rights as we have.

We may not be considered sentient by greatly superior beings.

 

[relaxeus]

We may not be considered sentient by greatly superior beings.

Maybe not. I would think that we would get some respect and attention though. What it comes down to for me is morality. We are capable of making moral decisions and this makes us equal to any other beings.

 

[kopilo]

Maybe not. I would think that we would get some respect and attention though. What it comes down to for me is morality. We are capable of making moral decisions and this makes us equal to any other beings.

If 'the beings' are equal then they are not superior.

 

[Misty Minister]

Maybe not. I would think that we would get some respect and attention though. What it comes down to for me is morality. We are capable of making moral decisions and this makes us equal to any other beings.

When an ant warrior sacrifices his life to protect the nest, is that a moral decision?

 

[Misty Minister]

The American War Between the States was fought mainly over tarrifs, water rights, and trade rights of the people in the southern states. The Northern industrialists were using the power of the Federal Government to restrict trade. Two northern states were exempt from the Emancipation Proclamation. The war was not about the freedom of the Negroid race. It was about property, money, and power.