Why would a good God let some people be born into existences that are truly nothing but misery?

[bornagainathiest]

3 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said:

Posted 2 hours ago

  3 hours ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

There's no point in following any guidelines if you don't get any benefit from doing so.

 

Being wiser, but still suffering God's curses doesn't seem like any kind of benefit to me.

 

How about the curses God inflicted on all of us, End?

 

You know... disease, deformity and death.  

 

 

How does following the 10 commandments undo the curse God placed on this child?

 

 

 

 

Where's the certainty that this isn't a result of man's sin?

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Now, you answered my question (highlighted) with a question.

 

I've responded and answered your new question.

 

So now it falls to you to answer my original question, End.

 

Please do so.

 

Here it is again.

 

How does following the 10 commandments undo the curse God placed on this child?

 

Bump!

[bornagainathiest]

9 minutes ago, end3 said:

No, BAA would be the first one to ask about "proof".  There are most likely mechanisms/reasons why this baby was born  as it was.  My question to him was what behaviors created this outcome.  He sure wanted to say,  "goddidit".

 

BECAUSE we also have physical things we may participate in that will change things for the "positive" if you will. 

 

 

 

No I wouldn't!  Take that back, End!

 

I'm on record (time and time again) as saying that proofs only exist in logic and math.

 

So please retract your claim about me asking for proof.

 

In the observational sciences there's no such thing as proof.

 

Please answer this and admit your error.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

47 minutes ago, end3 said:

It makes sense to me in light of our experiences.  You know, we can forgive and work with people that make mistakes...in honesty, and ignorance.  But it's another story when there are those that willingly choose to break trust. 

 

To answer your question.......we don't know why other than looking at the lives we are given and asking ourselves....does it make sense to follow this story or not.  I'm willing to continue with belief if the evidence henceforth is viable.

Did Adam and Eve not make their "mistake" in honesty, and ignorance?  Or are you suggesting that they weren't innocent before the fruit?  

[LogicalFallacy]

1 hour ago, end3 said:

No, BAA would be the first one to ask about "proof".

 

Really... so you think that someone would assert a positive and BAA would want "proof" of the negation? Either BAA an I have completely misunderstood you here or you really don't know BAA well.

 

1 hour ago, end3 said:

My question to him was what behaviors created this outcome. 

 

Your question assumes that behaviours caused that baby's condition. Do you have any evidence of this, or is it a result of naturally occurring defects?

[sdelsolray]

58 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Did Adam and Eve not make their "mistake" in honesty, and ignorance?  Or are you suggesting that they weren't innocent before the fruit?  

 

In his typical End3 passive-agrressive manor, End3 previously responded to this question (or one quite similar) with (and I paraphrase), 'As created, Adam and Eve had basic understandings of right and wrong, sufficient to blame them for what they did.'

[bornagainathiest]

Nov 20.

I ask End3, "Do the 10 commandments lift god's curses?"  

He doesn't answer.

 

 

Yesterday, at 09:37

I ask End3, "Do the 10 commandments lift god's curses?"    

He doesn't answer.

 

 

6 hours ago.

I ask End3, "Do the 10 commandments lift god's curses?" 

He replies... "I believe the commandments are a set of general rules given humanity ignorant and incapable of executing some standard morality."

Which is not an answer to my question.  His reply says nothing about the 10 commandments lifting god's curses.

 

 

4 hours ago.

I ask End3,  "How does following the 10 commandments undo the curse God placed on this child?"  

He replies..."Where's the certainty that this isn't a result of man's sin?"

Which is not an answer to my question, but a counter question.  One which I answer asap.

 

 

1 hour ago.

Having promptly answered End3's questions, I repeat my own question. 

"How does following the 10 commandments undo the curse God placed on this child?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

11 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

 

In his typical End3 passive-agrressive manor, End3 previously responded to this question (or one quite similar) with (and I paraphrase), 'As created, Adam and Eve had basic understandings of right and wrong, sufficient to blame them for what they did.'

Hmm... if they had basic understandings of right (good) and wrong (evil), then why would god see fit to test them with the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of...

[bornagainathiest]

Posted 1 hour ago

  1 hour ago, end3 said:

My question to you is, did God curse them before their behaviors?

BAA replied...  "What does the Bible say?"

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

To save having to bump, re-bump and keep re-bumping this question, I'll do the work for you, End.

 

Yes,  the Bible clearly and explicitly declares that God cursed everyone except Adam and Eve before they were born.

Adam and Eve were cursed by God after they had sinned.  (See Genesis 3 : 16 - 19)  But since the Bible also declares that every human being is descended from them, then God's curse affects every subsequent generation.  So every following generation was cursed by God BEFORE they even existed.

 

Therefore, according to scripture, nothing any generation does and no decision any generation can make can change that.

According to the Bible, NOTHING any parent ever does ever can lift the curses put upon them and their children by God.  God and only God is the sole source of all death, disease, corruption and deformity.  This is confirmed in the book of Romans. 

 

Romans 8:19-23 New International Version (NIV)

 

¹⁹ For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 

²⁰ For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 

²¹ that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

²² We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 

²³ Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. 

 

The entire human race is in bondage to decay, by God's choice.

By the will of the one (God) who created it.  It's there in b&w, End.  So, before we were born, God had made up His mind to curse us, regardless of how we behave.  Before you were born, God had made up His mind to curse you with disease, decrepitude and death.  It doesn't matter to Him how you live or if you follow the 10 commandments or not.  You are still going to get sick, get old and get dead.  His curse will remain in place on all of us until He lifts it, on Judgement Day.  (See Revelation 22 : 1 - 5)  His curse is upon the entire human race, from it's beginning to it's end.  That is exactly what the Bible says.

 

So, if you try and argue that each generation causes it's own misery - then that's not Biblical Christianity.  That's not in the scriptures.  That's heresy.

 

 

 

[sdelsolray]

1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Hmm... if they had basic understandings of right (good) and wrong (evil), then why would god see fit to test them with the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of...

 

You'll have to ask a Christian Apologist, such as End3.  Be prepared for more empty apologetics.  The myth is poor, inconsistent, shallow and meaningless fiction, notwithstanding the myth's popularity.  Put simply, the story/myth/legend/claim is nonsensical.

 

Parsimony is a theist's enemy.

[Guest end3]

2 hours ago, sdelsolray said:

 

You'll have to ask a Christian Apologist, such as End3.  Be prepared for more empty apologetics.  The myth is poor, inconsistent, shallow and meaningless fiction, notwithstanding the myth's popularity.  Put simply, the story/myth/legend/claim is nonsensical.

 

Parsimony is a theist's enemy.

Trust isn't always based on evidence.... go check the trust definition you parsimonious bastard...lol.  Betting you are a cheap lawyer as well...

[Lyra]

End3,

 

1. Why would a perfect, just, all-good God allow a person to be born in a North Korea prison camp, live their whole life there and die there, without knowing anything other than depravity and torture at the Auschwitz level, because their grandparents rebelled against the government? 

 

2. Even if we were to accept that the horribly deformed baby posted by BornAgainAtheist was the result of sin (assuming perhaps that the parents' "sin" led to it), why would an all-just and all-good perfect God make the innocent baby forced to live the life of nothing but suffering, instead of punishing the parent who sinned? Children are not just objects/extensions of their parents; they are sentient people of their own, so why would punishing a baby for the parents' sin be the action of a god worthy of worship?

 

People here have circled around the 10 commandments and petty definitions, but little has been said about these core issues.

 

Thanks,

Lyra

[bornagainathiest]

3 hours ago, end3 said:

Trust isn't always based on evidence.... go check the trust definition you parsimonious bastard...lol.  Betting you are a cheap lawyer as well...

 

But as I've shown, you aren't trusting in the Christian god, End.

 

You're actually trusting in the god of Endianity.

 

Which is your own personal and heretical blend of faux-genetics and karma, spiced with Mosaic Law and seasoned with only a passing nod to Jesus Christ.

 

If you really trusted in the Jesus Christ of the Bible you'd trust what the Bible actually says about sin.

 

But you don't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LogicalFallacy]

8 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Really... so you think that someone would assert a positive and BAA would want "proof" of the negation? Either BAA an I have completely misunderstood you here or you really don't know BAA well.

 

 

Your question assumes that behaviours caused that baby's condition. Do you have any evidence of this, or is it a result of naturally occurring defects?

Bump

[Guest end3]

9 hours ago, Lyra said:

End3,

 

1. Why would a perfect, just, all-good God allow a person to be born in a North Korea prison camp, live their whole life there and die there, without knowing anything other than depravity and torture at the Auschwitz level, because their grandparents rebelled against the government? 

 

2. Even if we were to accept that the horribly deformed baby posted by BornAgainAtheist was the result of sin (assuming perhaps that the parents' "sin" led to it), why would an all-just and all-good perfect God make the innocent baby forced to live the life of nothing but suffering, instead of punishing the parent who sinned? Children are not just objects/extensions of their parents; they are sentient people of their own, so why would punishing a baby for the parents' sin be the action of a god worthy of worship?

 

People here have circled around the 10 commandments and petty definitions, but little has been said about these core issues.

 

Thanks,

Lyra

I think Lyra, it comes down to the value of our lives, a value that WE must come to understand, the value of living to a certain standard in order that our lives make it better for our children,.....not only a physical inheritance, but a moral one as well.  When people die, I think it's important to be able to look at that life....from a survivors standpoint, and be the recipient of a positive inheritance in order that the cycle may continue.  If we leave dysfunction, then humanity is just a step behind in achieving what we all would wish to happen.

 

I believe this more a function of our own behavior, than of God determining, "you are sentenced".  I do, however, think we will account for our choices at some point. 

 

And one may only speculate where lasting change originates.  From a prison camp, from a poor neighborhood? 

 

And I have come to believe the entire think hinges on trust rather than rules.  We are certain we can't keep the rules.  We can though, remain trusting.....allowing for others egregious mistakes while they allow for ours......not giving up on our brothers.  However, I think that sin has taken us to a point where the physical is severely damaged in some cases....just an aside. 

 

Probably a better statement of what I was meaning by self-imposed.

 

Thanks L

[bornagainathiest]

1 hour ago, end3 said:

I think Lyra, it comes down to the value of our lives, a value that WE must come to understand, the value of living to a certain standard in order that our lives make it better for our children,.....not only a physical inheritance, but a moral one as well.  When people die, I think it's important to be able to look at that life....from a survivors standpoint, and be the recipient of a positive inheritance in order that the cycle may continue.  If we leave dysfunction, then humanity is just a step behind in achieving what we all would wish to happen.

 

I believe this more a function of our own behavior, than of God determining, "you are sentenced".  I do, however, think we will account for our choices at some point. 

 

And one may only speculate where lasting change originates.  From a prison camp, from a poor neighborhood? 

 

And I have come to believe the entire think hinges on trust rather than rules.  We are certain we can't keep the rules.  We can though, remain trusting.....allowing for others egregious mistakes while they allow for ours......not giving up on our brothers.  However, I think that sin has taken us to a point where the physical is severely damaged in some cases....just an aside. 

 

Probably a better statement of what I was meaning by self-imposed.

 

Thanks L

 

But what you write here End, is not a description of Biblical Christianity.

 

Lyra's question was about the 'good' God of the Christian Bible and you haven't answered her question.

 

Instead, you've described Endianity, where the actions of each generation have an effect, not only on themselves, but on the following generations.

 

But this is not Christianity - it's your own heretical belief that isn't supported by scripture.

 

As I have demonstrated from the text of the Bible, the Christian God HAS sentenced everyone to pain, suffering and death.

 

Our behaviors cannot undo that, nor can they modify or change what God has ordained to happen.

 

So please confirm to Lyra that you were talking about the god of Endianity, not the God of Christianity.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

[florduh]

In memory of the original topic..........

 

Babies being born into miserable, hopeless situations is what's in question. I have no problem with people getting their just desserts. Human beings seem to like the idea of justice and we have come up with all sorts of belief mechanisms that assure us it all works out in the end. If the good is not rewarded and the bad punished in this life then there must be a next life where everything will be straightened out. Most people need to believe something like this just to cope with the horrible things that happen to the innocent and the success enjoyed by the guilty. Many will even bastardize the "karma" belief into a "what goes around comes around" philosophy they actually seem to believe. Obviously, reality does not conform to such ideas and offers no evidence of justice being served in some other world or existence. Most just believe what makes them feel good.

 

Clearly, those who believe that some "sin of the father" is justifiably visited upon some baby born into slavery, born with mother's heroin addiction, born without limbs or sight, born into all the misery thrust upon so many innocent children, well, they are simply monsters.

[Guest end3]

3 minutes ago, florduh said:

In memory of the original topic..........

 

Clearly, those who believe that some "sin of the father" is visited upon some baby born into slavery, born with mother's heroin addiction, born without limbs or sight, born into all the misery thrust upon so many innocent children, well, they are simply monsters.

Guess you lost me C.  Not sure how we may argue that a child is more advantaged being born into addiction, poverty, etc. as a result the parents behaviors, or parents before them, are not in part the parents contributions. 

 

Again, are we going to discount prenatal vitamins, folic acid supplements as monsters as well?

 

[florduh]

7 minutes ago, end3 said:

Guess you lost me C.  Not sure how we may argue that a child is more advantaged being born into addiction, poverty, etc. as a result the parents behaviors, or parents before them, are not in part the parents contributions. 

 

Again, are we going to discount prenatal vitamins, folic acid supplements as monsters as well?

 

No, parents are responsible for doing as much as they can to ensure they bring a healthy fetus to term. That isn't the issue. The problem is introducing the notion that a child being born into suffering, often beyond a parent's control, due to "original sin" is justified. We are assuming for the sake of argument that there is a supernatural entity in charge of everything.

 

[bornagainathiest]

29 minutes ago, florduh said:

In memory of the original topic..........

 

Babies being born into miserable, hopeless situations is what's in question. I have no problem with people getting their just desserts. Human beings seem to like the idea of justice and we have come up with all sorts of belief mechanisms that assure us it all works out in the end. If the good is not rewarded and the bad punished in this life then there must be a next life where everything will be straightened out. Most people need to believe something like this just to cope with the horrible things that happen to the innocent and the success enjoyed by the guilty. Many will even bastardize the "karma" belief into a "what goes around comes around" philosophy they actually seem to believe. Obviously, reality does not conform to such ideas and offers no evidence of justice being served in some other world or existence. Most just believe what makes them feel good.

 

Clearly, those who believe that some "sin of the father" is justifiably visited upon some baby born into slavery, born with mother's heroin addiction, born without limbs or sight, born into all the misery thrust upon so many innocent children, well, they are simply monsters.

 

A point of order, Florduh.

 

Lyra's OP and question was about the Christian god.  According to the Bible that God doesn't do what End3 claims he does.  End's god inflicts the sins of the parents onto the child.  But the god of the Bible doesn't do that.  So, strictly speaking, he hasn't been answering Lyra's question.  

 

In this thread there are two themes running in parallel.

Lyra's questions about the God of the Bible and End's different god.  Whenever the topic veers on to generational sin, then the God of the bible and the bible itself is not being discussed.  So, if you're tackling End about generational sin, then you and he aren't keeping to Lyra's question or topic.

 

See it now?

 

[Guest end3]

33 minutes ago, florduh said:

No, parents are responsible for doing as much as they can to ensure they bring a healthy fetus to term. That isn't the issue. The problem is introducing the notion that a child being born into suffering, often beyond a parent's control, due to "original sin" is justified. We are assuming for the sake of argument that there is a supernatural entity in charge of everything.

 

Ok, thx.  I thought it was an "assumed" given the Christian/Ex-Christian context. 

 

Edit: Again, if we may have effects from things generations ago, yet not immediately the fault of the current parents, how may we discount this?

[Guest end3]

15 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

A point of order, Florduh.

 

Lyra's OP and question was about the Christian god.  According to the Bible that God doesn't do what End3 claims he does.  End's god inflicts the sins of the parents onto the child.  But the god of the Bible doesn't do that.  So, strictly speaking, he hasn't been answering Lyra's question.  

 

In this thread there are two themes running in parallel.

Lyra's questions about the God of the Bible and End's different god.  Whenever the topic veers on to generational sin, then the God of the bible and the bible itself is not being discussed.  So, if you're tackling End about generational sin, then you and he aren't keeping to Lyra's question or topic.

 

See it now?

 

No, I think it says that God will not punish the sons for the fathers and the fathers for the sons, but to each his own sins.  I think what it DOES say is that fatherly mismanagement may affect his children for generations......hence not the big book of rules to keep the fathers from mismanagement, but general commandments to guide and adhere to.  And then ultimately Grace.

[bornagainathiest]

36 minutes ago, end3 said:

No, I think it says that God will not punish the sons for the fathers and the fathers for the sons, but to each his own sins.  I think what it DOES say is that fatherly mismanagement may affect his children for generations......hence not the big book of rules to keep the fathers from mismanagement, but general commandments to guide and adhere to.  And then ultimately Grace.

 

All well and good, End.

 

But Lyra didn't ask about parents adversely affecting the lives of their children by mismanagement. 

She asked about why God would 'sentence' people to a horrible life.  She talked about God making things harder for them, not their parents or ancestors making things harder for them.  This was her OP.

Posted November 18

In Christianity, when people have terrible traumas/tragedies in life, it's generally compared to Job and accompanied by statements like "God is making things harder for you now but they will be so much better later." Examples cited are often things like...you lose your job but it leads to a better one, or there's a family tragedy but then it brings the whole extended family together, or you come from an abusive childhood but then are inspired to a career of helping others, and so on. But in those examples, there's typically the assumption that the people involved are able to someday have mostly good lives despite the pain: living in a wealthy free country, having decent health (or a handicap they can still live happy lives with), having opportunity to move forward, etc.

 

But what about the people who are truly born into terrible, hellish lives? For instance: people in North Korea who spend their entire lives in Auschwitz-like prison camps because their grandparent rebelled against the government. Or the victims of human trafficking all over the world. Or the Untouchable castes in  India where someone is socially ostracized and forced to work jobs like cleaning inside the sewers, with little to no hope of escaping that fate. Or the starving kids in 3rd-world countries with horrible deformities and no resources to cure them, etc.

 

We always hear of inspirational stories of people who came from awful backgrounds of hardship, and it's wonderful that those people could overcome it. But many can't. And for the ones that will never have a chance or who will never find comfort or happiness, why would an "all good God" sentence some people to being born into lives that are worse than having never been born?

 

Her focus was on God, not any generation of humans.

So when you replied to her saying...  'It's sin Lyra...it's self imposed.'  ...you weren't answering her question about God.  Instead you were referring to human generational sin.  But Lyra's question was about what God does, not what any human does.  In this whole thread you've focused on the wrong thing and failed to address Lyra's topic or question.  She wants Christian members of Ex-C like yourself to comment about God - not to comment about any generation of humans.

 

See where you've diverged from Lyra's topic and question?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

End3,

 

1. Why would a perfect, just, all-good God allow a person to be born in a North Korea prison camp, live their whole life there and die there, without knowing anything other than depravity and torture at the Auschwitz level, because their grandparents rebelled against the government? 

 

2. Even if we were to accept that the horribly deformed baby posted by BornAgainAtheist was the result of sin (assuming perhaps that the parents' "sin" led to it), why would an all-just and all-good perfect God make the innocent baby forced to live the life of nothing but suffering, instead of punishing the parent who sinned? Children are not just objects/extensions of their parents; they are sentient people of their own, so why would punishing a baby for the parents' sin be the action of a god worthy of worship?

 

People here have circled around the 10 commandments and petty definitions, but little has been said about these core issues.

 

Thanks,

Lyra

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

End,

 

Once again Lyra is asking about God, not about the parents or children.

 

So any comments from you about generational sin and what humans do or don't do is off-topic.

 

Lyra is asking about God, not people.

 

 

[Guest end3]

1 minute ago, bornagainathiest said:

End3,

 

1. Why would a perfect, just, all-good God allow a person to be born in a North Korea prison camp, live their whole life there and die there, without knowing anything other than depravity and torture at the Auschwitz level, because their grandparents rebelled against the government? 

 

2. Even if we were to accept that the horribly deformed baby posted by BornAgainAtheist was the result of sin (assuming perhaps that the parents' "sin" led to it), why would an all-just and all-good perfect God make the innocent baby forced to live the life of nothing but suffering, instead of punishing the parent who sinned? Children are not just objects/extensions of their parents; they are sentient people of their own, so why would punishing a baby for the parents' sin be the action of a god worthy of worship?

 

People here have circled around the 10 commandments and petty definitions, but little has been said about these core issues.

 

Thanks,

Lyra

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

End,

 

Once again Lyra is asking about God, not about the parents or children.

 

So any comments from you about generational sin and what humans do or don't do is off-topic.

 

Lyra is asking about God, not people.

 

 

Well let's go with this then.....and this is just a guess.  Given God Omni-everything, I suggest that he want to create a partner for himself, a friend.  So essentially, create a robot or create a free-will entity.  So I expect the Jesus mechanism is a way to bring humanity to partnership status. 

[LogicalFallacy]

1 hour ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

A point of order, Florduh.

 

Lyra's OP and question was about the Christian god.  According to the Bible that God doesn't do what End3 claims he does.  End's god inflicts the sins of the parents onto the child.  But the god of the Bible doesn't do that. 

 

May I raise a point of order to a point of order. This is going to devolve into  interpretation and doctrine...

But there is the case to be found in the bible of God saying both that the child is not responsible for the sin of its father, AND that the sins of the father shall be visited upon the children UNTO the forth generation! (At least 4 times it states this)

 

This is one of those biblical contradictions. Depending on the doctrine and how judgemental a person is depends on which of these they choose to believe that their God holds.

 

My church for instance believes the latter, and thus a child born out of wedlock is not able to come into the tabernacle (read church) of the congregation. So deeply held is this belief that the pastor holds that his adopted sister who was born from an affair is thus not a true child of god because of the sins of her biological parents. Its one of the things that really started making me question the church and my own morality as I found the concept so repulsive that a person could not go to heaven because their parents had sex in a manner other than dictated in the bible.