What God allows Satan to do

[nobspeople]

There are those that are 'bad' people and they seem to prosper, while there are 'good' people that don't seem to prosper (generally speaking - there are always exceptions).

By allowing this, is God 'shooting himself in the foot'?

People look around and see so many deserving people having a difficult time in life, many (maybe even most) of the time, these people are good people - some are even believers.

People look around and see so many undeserving people prospering in life, enjoying it without a care in the world, they're not 'God fearing' or believers.

Even IF, we could show more believers are prospering while non-believers aren't, does God allowing the 'good to suffer and bad to prosper' cause less people to turn to him, thusly, 'shooting himself in the foot' as the saying goes?

It would seem that, if God wanted more people to come to him, he could use prosperity in life as a means to do so, while showing a life that's not prosperous as a negative for not following him.

Yes yes, we ALL know that this life isn't what's important, it's eternity blah blah blah, but - here and now - this is where he can find people to come to him. Once your life here is done (most believe) it's too late to change your mind.

So do you think it smarter for God to use prosperity as a (though not only) means to bring people to him? You catch more flies with honey than vinegar, as they say.
Or does causing suffering a much more productive way?

[Miles]

.

STOP ASKING EMBARRASSING QUESTIONS !!!!!

.

[brunumb]

[Replying to nobspeople in post #1]

"God works in mysterious ways". Which is just a polite way of saying that God is a simpleton who couldn't even organise and run a church fete. What God allegedly allows or doesn't allow has nothing to do with God. The arguments are the feeble attempts on the part of human beings to attract new members into the fold. If the arguments are flawed, they just reflect the flawed thinking of ordinary people.

[Diagoras]

So do you think it smarter for God to use prosperity as a (though not only) means to bring people to him? You catch more flies with honey than vinegar, as they say.
Or does causing suffering a much more productive way?

I would argue there’s strong biblical evidence that God uses both - a ‘carrot and stick’ approach. For instance:

Deuteronomy 28:11

And the LORD shall make thee plenteous in goods, in the fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy ground, in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers to give thee.

Deuteronomy 28:29

And thou shalt grope at noonday, as the blind gropeth in darkness, and thou shalt not prosper in thy ways: and thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled evermore, and no man shall save thee.

However, I support the opening post’s position, since from both a quantitative and qualitative perspective, there’s a strong biblical bias toward the ‘stick’. In that quoted chapter of Deuteronomy, verses 1 to 13 offer the ‘carrot’, while verses 15 to 68 (so four times as many) deal with the ‘stick’. Many of them are duplicates of one another of course, but taken as a whole, it’s made plain that the LORD will rejoice over you to destroy you (verse 63).

Is this ‘smarter’ though? I suspect the answer has varied considerably through the ages. In early Christianity, certainly - keeping the populace in terror of a seemingly omnipotent God made good sense. But in modern times, it appears that at least some would-be religious leaders understand the ‘merit’ of appealing to people’s more material side. Think ‘televangelism’ and Pentecostal churces, but many good examples can be found from this article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperit ... nt_history

[mms20102]

does God allowing the 'good to suffer and bad to prosper' cause less people to turn to him, thusly, 'shooting himself in the foot' as the saying goes?

It would seem that, if God wanted more people to come to him, he could use prosperity in life as a means to do so, while showing a life that's not prosperous as a negative for not following him.

It would seem that, if God wanted more people to come to him, he could use prosperity in life as a means to do so, while showing a life that's not prosperous as a negative for not following him.

I guess you suppose that God is a prosperity supplier, not a creator. Believing in God doesn't require God or force him to do anything to us. We are obliged to worship him even if we get nothing since worshipping is not related to gains and rewards or even related to punishment in the first place but related to the fact that our creator by logic deserves worshipping for being the highest superior force in the universe.

WASHINGTON — A Michigan State University sociologist reports in The Journal of Health and Social Behavior that religious participation affects suicide rates differently around the world, and in Latin America particularly, high religious involvement is associated with low suicide rates.

https://dc.medill.northwestern.edu/blog ... BIzPH.dpbs
The definition of prosperity in your opinion seems to be more money and life pleasures but pleasures and money didn't prevent people from suicide in fact although those non-believers had prosperity they were more prone to suicide.

So do you think it smarter for God to use prosperity as a (though not only) means to bring people to him? You catch more flies with honey than vinegar, as they say.
Or does cause suffering in a much more productive way?

Prosperity was used and it gained so many followers through the afterlife approach, since you can't get rewarded before the end of the test you have you have to get tested to show how worthy you are, so if a believer like you say wasn't prospered with money and other things, that means he is getting tested to get a higher reward than normal people, even prosperous people are being tested on how they will do with all the wealth they have whether they will spend it to help others or become fallen in the worldly pleasures.

[1213]

There are those that are 'bad' people and they seem to prosper, while there are 'good' people that don't seem to prosper (generally speaking - there are always exceptions)...
...It would seem that, if God wanted more people to come to him, he could use prosperity in life as a means to do so, while showing a life that's not prosperous as a negative for not following him....

By what I see, the more nice things person has, the more probably he rejects God. And on the other hand, when things go bad, people tend to return to God. If things are well, it appears people tend to think it is because of how good they are and that they don’t need God. And if things are bad, people either return to God and ask mercy, or return to God and blame God for everything, which is not very logical, if person doesn’t ever thank God when good things happen. I don’t believe giving prosperity would really make any difference commonly.

Also, in Biblical point of view only God is good.
...No one is good, except one-God.
Luke 18:19

[nobspeople]

[Replying to 1213 in post #6]

By what I see, the more nice things person has, the more probably he rejects God.

I guess we have a different opinion of what 'nice things' are.
A nice house, car, loving spouse, nice job, decent clothes, fun times on the weekend with family and friends....none of those things would make me reject God. If anything, it would make me more thankful.

Luke 18:19

Of course, when compared to God. Which is not what this is about.

[brunumb]

We are obliged to worship him even if we get nothing since worshipping is not related to gains and rewards or even related to punishment in the first place but related to the fact that our creator by logic deserves worshipping for being the highest superior force in the universe.

Acknowledge, admire, respect even, but worship, no. There is nothing logical about worship. It is one of the most worthless and time wasting activities ever invented by human beings.

[nobspeople]

We are obliged to worship him even if we get nothing since worshipping is not related to gains and rewards or even related to punishment in the first place but related to the fact that our creator by logic deserves worshipping for being the highest superior force in the universe.

Acknowledge, admire, respect even, but worship, no. There is nothing logical about worship. It is one of the most worthless and time wasting activities ever invented by human beings.

I think worship is logical and worthy if it helps the person involved (even if it's simply psychological). But telling others they MUST worship is wrong IMO.

[brunumb]

[Replying to nobspeople in post #9]

I don't see what's logical about it and I don't see how anyone is worthy of being worshiped. Stroking an enormous ego really does nothing of value to either party.