Cornavirus why did god create it

[Donray]

Why did God create a new virus to kill people? This is a question for any Christain that believes in the Noah myth or creationism. Because if either is true then God did create this virus and did it to kill people.

Also, why does God allow this virus when he could wave his wand and get rid of it?

[TheGreatDebate]

[Replying to post 15 by Red Wolf]

I have no doubts that people today would like Satan over God. Satan is the one arguing for equal rights.

[TheGreatDebate]

[Replying to post 17 by Purple Knight]

Thus good is simply a measure of moral authority.

No, only authority.

You have a very good understanding of how morality works and that is why I dont understand how you get to philosophers discovering rights.

With no God, there ultimately is no right and wrong to discover. There is no divine or cosmic sense of justice that must be fulfilled, there is only power. One king may enforce a particular rule over a populace that he determines is right or wrong but once he is dead, it is up to the next guys opinion. You can go into social contract, etc but it all ultimately leads to the opinion of whoever has the ability to extend influence over others.

I would really like to discuss this topic further with you if you still disagree and/or want to. I am curious as to why you think people can find morality in an atheistic worldview.

God is the ultimate sense of divine or cosmic justice that must be satisfied. He has the biggest the stick. Morality is simply His opinion.

[TheGreatDebate]

[Replying to post 18 by Willum]

You are correct. God is not good. Good is whatever He determines it to be. Morality is simply His opinion.

[Zzyzx]

.

If someone was putting together an Ikea furniture and did not follow the instructions and did not put it together correctly, can he blame Ikea for it? If one thinks they know how to do things without consulting the instructions, who's to blame if things go wrong?

Would Ikea instructions be useful if they were written by people who could not be shown to have knowledge of furniture assembly; written in dead languages and translated variously to and through other languages; copied repeatedly by hand through many generations; spoke in vague terms and contradicted themselves?

If people would practice eating only clean animals, it would reduce the risk of the introduction of viruses into the human population.

An effective means of preventing diseases transmitted by eating contaminated meat (or vegetative matter) is to COOK FOOD THOROUGHLY before eating. It is also wise to boil water and to wash hands (instead of feet).

Of course, ancient writers are not expected to know such things; however, modern people should. Presumably any 'omniscient' entity would know.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 22 by TheGreatDebate]

I am curious as to why you think people can find morality in an atheistic worldview.

Have you seen sheep in a field, or cows, living harmoniously among themselves (or any other social animal besides humans)? Why aren't they constantly fighting, eating their young (or not defending them if threatened), etc.? They don't have the Ten Commandments or any god to provide moral direction, yet they "behave."

Basic morals don't come from religion or direction from a god ... they are inherent in all social animals or they could not continue to survive. An atheistic worldview just dispenses with the idea that morals (or disease, accidents, happiness, famines, etc.) have any connection to a god being of some sort. It does not (and cannot) dispense with the basic moral behavior that is necessary to survive as a social animal (primates in the case of humans).

There is no need for a god of any kind to exist to dictate what moral behavior is satisfactory. The society, and the requirement to coexist within it, is the moral arbiter (whether humans, or some other social animal).

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 18 by Willum]

You are correct. God is not good. Good is whatever He determines it to be. Morality is simply His opinion.

The problem is that we never get anything directly from this God, only from his alleged intermediaries. It is really hard not to reach the conclusion that it all really comes from those intermediaries and that there is no God there at all.

[Purple Knight]

Thus good is simply a measure of moral authority.

No, only authority.

Right. But the authority to create morality.

You have a very good understanding of how morality works and that is why I dont understand how you get to philosophers discovering rights.

With authority. I see no reason why the morally highest among humans cannot create their own moral dictates that, in absence of direct veto from a higher power (either because it doesn't care or because it doesn't exist) are simply valid.

I would really like to discuss this topic further with you if you still disagree and/or want to. I am curious as to why you think people can find morality in an atheistic worldview.

God is the ultimate sense of divine or cosmic justice that must be satisfied. He has the biggest the stick. Morality is simply His opinion.

And in absence of that opinion, it falls to the moral greats of our society. That's what I think, anyway.

Imagine if you will, a sub-god, one just like God, except without perfect omnipotence. It turns out that this sub-god can do everything God can do, except override God (and he can't blow up a balloon). This sub-god's word is gold unless God says it's not, right?

Well imagine a sub-sub-god. This one is slightly less omnipotent than even sub-god. His stick is just slightly smaller. (He can't blow up a balloon, and he can't dance the Jitterbug.) His word is still gold if not for the word of God, or of sub-god, right?

Now keep imagining down until you get to the most perfect humans. I was being somewhat facetious about the specific things they can't do, specifically to draw attention to the fact that whether you can blow up a balloon or not has no bearing on morality.

It might be relevant if there was still a stick - a punisher, capable of punishing evil, or a rewarder, capable of rewarding what he sees as good - but if sticks mattered, that would mean the Nazis would be moral... if they won. Most people accept that this isn't true.

I argue that those humans with the greatest moral perfection are themselves the authority unless somebody with more authority says different, or, if you think sticks matter, actually punishes them in clean view.

[Gracchus]

[Replying to post 27 by Purple Knight]

So you think, Mr. Knight, that there are "moral greats" who should decide for us what is moral? I think that others might disagree with that premise, and I am sure others would disagree about who would qualify as morally "great".

[2ndRateMind]

[Replying to post 1 by Donray]

Oh, that's obvious! God hates China and the Chinese, and anyone who deals with them.

But, more seriously, just as pain is our signal that we are damaging our bodies, disease is our signal that we are damaging our societies.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[AgnosticBoy]

Why did God create a new virus to kill people? This is a question for any Christain that believes in the Noah myth or creationism. Because if either is true then God did create this virus and did it to kill people.

Also, why does God allow this virus when he could wave his wand and get rid of it?

I don't find these types of arguments to be fully sound. The concept of the 'greater good' is that evil can lead to something good. So perhaps this is life. God is allowing or even using evil to bring about a greater good.