[X] My Assistant

The "supreme being" could be anything.

It is helpful to classify them by type and scope of power (are they omnipresent or omnipotent? Are they capable of physical manifestation? Do they have a purpose or 'alignment'?). However from my experience the people I know who do believe in a God use the concept as a motivator, a kind of psychological opium and have highly "personalized" definitions of God. That is, they mold it to what they want it to be to some extent. In a sense, I see it as externalizing intrinsic motivation in order to make it more compelling. People will conveniently ignore apparently malevolent or dark sides of religion, or interpret them against groups they don't like.

As to the topic at hand: this is very much related to the [en.wikipedia.org] problem of evil.
There are many possibilities as to why a god wouldn't 'heal' people. In some models of religion, God merely creates the universe and lets it run its course. (Some variants of simple deism). Another possible reason could be that he considers the existence of suffering to be an inseparable and essential part of life (I've heard this linked to original sin -- not that this makes much sense when you consider 'miracles'). Another explanation is that by interfering with the human world he would be denying us agency/freedom in a fundamental way. In other words, you're right LoS -- the answer would depend very much on what idea of god you're talking about.

3. I believe God exist. But God isn't some street magician or "blessed healer" (which are just fraudsters). God can give you power to move forward regardless of the life circumstances, but he can't wave around you with some magical wand and make you a motherfuckin' new leg.

If you replace the word 'God' with 'believing in yourself', I'll agree. Why call that God?

Who talks about replacing? Believing in some absolute force doesn't stop you from believing in yourself. God is not a fireman or rescue ranger - you must help yourself.

Well, you wrote 'God can give you power to move forward regardless of life circumstances'. And then, that God won't help you, 'you must help yourself'. So, you mean that he can help me, but he won't? What's the point of mentioning him then?
It seems there's no need for a god in this explanation, when you consider the effects of believing in yourself, I don't see anything god has to add to that.

And no, humans are not Chosen. That's just stupid. We're living on a little polluted planet on the backyard of the Universe.

That implies that revelations are made to every thinking creature in the Universe? Well, people of the Americas didn't get such revelation directly, Spanish were "deputized" to christianize them, so I guess if humans ever encounter other intelligent beings, it'll turn out they're in need of revelation as well. Regardless which of today's religions would be the true one.

As to the topic at hand: this is very much related to the [en.wikipedia.org] problem of evil.

The paradox of a deity who would end up being good and evil at the same time. There's a catch, though.

Good and evil as seen in most cultures and religions are subjective concepts indeed.

In most cultures, killing someone technically makes you "evil" - because 1) it is unlawful and 2) you are acting against another person's will. Euthanasia obviously comes to mind here. This isn't exactly on-topic, but would euthanasia be "evil" in a country where it is legal, yet the person is unable to express their will, such as comatose with a slight chance of waking up with major disabilities or affected with severe mental issues ?

The only thing I'd remotely consider as evil is disregarding all laws and rules, acting out of one's free will, being oblivious to everything and acting for one's own profit or survival, all the time, no matter what happens, in a similar way a wild animal gone berserk would. In other words, complete anarchy (or chaos). And yet this is pure opinion, because this is nothing but unrestrained freedom. We are humans because we are above this. The instant you lose the ability to grasp this concept, you become a mere wild beast that's dangerous to others and even itself.

As for William L. Rowe's example of "natural evil", it is only evil because it results in atypical death of a living entity. But was it really atypical ? Was it not part of the scheme ? Maybe the superior entity decided it was its time as well. Nature often acts in odd ways, and the best explanation non-believers can come up with is "wrong place, wrong time" when something "bad" happens. Or simply as "shit happens".

But let's get back "on topic" - most religions only refer as their gods as almighty beings. They don't mention anything about their karma. In fact, it is implicitly or even explicitly written in most books that they almost all have committed terrible sins, such as killing animals, people or other gods for various reasons. Yet, many believers think the god(s) they believe in are incapable of harm.

They usually don't mention anything about their abilities being universal, either. Worshippers probably decided to go with it because it was a profitable path to follow and thought "if my local god could cure this, then it might work for me as well". There are different kinds of believers. Some believers use religion as a shelter (usually after a trauma), pray on a regular basis and hope that something good will happen or merely hope that the situation won't get any worse. Some pray for a better world. Some only pray when in dire straits. Some interpret the teachings in their own way and abuse them to commit crimes and blame them on religion.

Follow your own path and deal with the consequences. Pick what's best for you.

This post has been edited by Mika Kurogane: Apr 24 2012, 14:51

In most cultures, killing someone technically makes you "evil" - because 1) it is unlawful and 2) you are acting against another person's will. Euthanasia obviously comes to mind here. This isn't exactly on-topic, but would euthanasia be "evil" in a country where it is legal, yet the person is unable to express their will, such as comatose with a slight chance of waking up with major disabilities or affected with severe mental issues ?

You're right, the whole of morality is incredibly subjective. In fact, there are no completely consistent, coherent and universally applicable ethical systems in existence. Utilitarianism has huge problems with regard to fairness; Kantian ethics either fails to provide meaningful answers in some situations or makes sweeping generalizations that lead to unpleasant situations in others. ( With regards to your question, utilitarianism would say it's probably not evil (reduced cost to society, chance of suffering, etc) while K would say that it is evil.

The issue in attributing these sorts of things to any deity is that, as you said, there is no way to directly establish karma. For many people, God is not only good but without error. This is a convenient way to rationalize evil deeds, dispel despair when all hope is lost, etc. The big picture is that there is no way to rationally establish what any particular God deems to be good in every possible situation. Religion doesn't even provide this level of logical definition. They only provide a black box set of commandments without giving believers the ability to 'reverse-engineer' it to an ethical foundation like utilitarianism or Kantian ethics.

Therefore,

Follow your own path and deal with the consequences. Pick what's best for you.

As long as you meant this as "do what you think is best", I 100% agree.

Yeah, better phrasing. "Pick what's best for you" is kind of ambiguous.

Allah and God are the same. In the end we are creatures and God is the creator. His will is above all.

The only thing I'd remotely consider as evil is disregarding all laws and rules, acting out of one's free will, being oblivious to everything and acting for one's own profit or survival, all the time, no matter what happens, in a similar way a wild animal gone berserk would

The gone berserk part here isn't necessary, that's what every single animal on the planet (human excepted) do, except they don't break rules because they obviously don't have any. And it's natural. That may be why monotheists religions don't think animals have souls? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

And god probably doesn't heal amputees for the same reason he created the possibility that we could lose limbs, and it may have something to do with the fact that they don't grow back by themselves.

I'll admit that "a wild animal gone berserk" smells like a tautology. Maybe a rabid animal would be a better example.

Studies show that some animals, such as elephants, actually use a complex social hierarchy and rules. They also have feelings and intelligence.
A rabid elephant (when in doubt, stomp) would merely rely on its aggressive instincts and completely disregard that structure.

I'd get back "on topic" but I believe everything has been said on this topic. Feel free to add something new.

This post has been edited by Mika Kurogane: May 25 2012, 03:11

God doesn't exist and shit, human constructs to explain the stranger things back then, etc.

They don't heal amputees because it would give firm evidence that they exist. Can't have that (IMG:[img716.imageshack.us] http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1276/tinyf.gif)

(half joking)

because turning to science and get a bionic limb is way, WAY better than your weak fleshy human limb.

If God goes around healing all the amputees of the world, I don't suppose he'd mind stopping off at my house and endowing me with a 10 inch wang, right? It's the battle between God the Creator and God the Interventionist.

God has other stuff to worry about. And really, I'd rather he didn't. I prefer that God work in mysterious/subtle ways. I prefer the illusion of free will.

If you pray to God with enough faith, he will heal people such as terminally ill cancer patients. So why won't he heal the amputees? Does he discrimnate against certain groups of ailing people?

Ihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Televangelism
[en.wikipedia.org] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_healing

I accept your apology: however, God doesn't want you listening to false prophets.
[youtu.be] http://youtu.be/BXYBwe04jtY

This post has been edited by tentacle-man61: Jun 19 2012, 16:21

God has other stuff to worry about. And really, I'd rather he didn't. I prefer that God work in mysterious/subtle ways. I prefer the illusion of free will.

So then why bother believing in him/her/whatever in the first place? If you believe in God you might as well make your faith a large part of your life.