Could God do better?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Paul of Tarsus
Banned
Banned
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:42 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 150 times

Could God do better?

Post #1

Post by Paul of Tarsus »

The philosopher Gottfried Leibniz argued that this is "the best of all possible worlds" to free God from blame for the world's troubles. In other words, this world, warts and all, is the best God could have done. I'm left wondering, though, why this world is the best possible. It seems likely to me that the world would be better off without cancer, for example, and therefore it's really not the best possible world. Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do? If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #31

Post by nobspeople »

Paul of Tarsus wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 7:45 pm The philosopher Gottfried Leibniz argued that this is "the best of all possible worlds" to free God from blame for the world's troubles. In other words, this world, warts and all, is the best God could have done. I'm left wondering, though, why this world is the best possible. It seems likely to me that the world would be better off without cancer, for example, and therefore it's really not the best possible world. Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do? If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?
The teaching I received was God created perfection: no death, no illness, no need for predator and prey, and on and on. It was man (aka sin) that jacked up the whole situation. So, in that sense, there was no need for God to 'do better' and it was perfection originally.
The issue I always took with this 'teaching' was, how can something so miniscule as a human screw everything up UNLESS, God was OK with it (some say it was 'his plan')? In that case, I question God and its motives as well as its sense of responsibility. Neither are items I'd attribute to an all knowing, loving god.

To me, the whole concept of a perfect being creating everything AND loving humanity as much as it's claimed to do is beyond silly,, as well as misguided. That said, I can totally understand why someone would buy into this farce.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Paul of Tarsus
Banned
Banned
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:42 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 150 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #32

Post by Paul of Tarsus »

nobspeople wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 9:09 amThe teaching I received was God created perfection: no death, no illness, no need for predator and prey, and on and on. It was man (aka sin) that jacked up the whole situation. So, in that sense, there was no need for God to 'do better' and it was perfection originally.
The issue I always took with this 'teaching' was, how can something so miniscule as a human screw everything up UNLESS, God was OK with it (some say it was 'his plan')? In that case, I question God and its motives as well as its sense of responsibility. Neither are items I'd attribute to an all knowing, loving god.

To me, the whole concept of a perfect being creating everything AND loving humanity as much as it's claimed to do is beyond silly,, as well as misguided. That said, I can totally understand why someone would buy into this farce.
Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do? If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #33

Post by nobspeople »

Paul of Tarsus wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 12:16 pm
nobspeople wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 9:09 amThe teaching I received was God created perfection: no death, no illness, no need for predator and prey, and on and on. It was man (aka sin) that jacked up the whole situation. So, in that sense, there was no need for God to 'do better' and it was perfection originally.
The issue I always took with this 'teaching' was, how can something so miniscule as a human screw everything up UNLESS, God was OK with it (some say it was 'his plan')? In that case, I question God and its motives as well as its sense of responsibility. Neither are items I'd attribute to an all knowing, loving god.

To me, the whole concept of a perfect being creating everything AND loving humanity as much as it's claimed to do is beyond silly,, as well as misguided. That said, I can totally understand why someone would buy into this farce.
Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do? If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?
Having survived pancreatic cancer, yes, I can say my world would be better without it.
But who's saying the world is the best possible world?
No on that I've seen. :shock:

I've always thought it funny when someone survives cancer. Or a horrible accident. And people say 'God took care of them!'
Yet other people are dying of cancer, or accidents all the time.
Using that logic, if God 'cares' for someone that survives, he must 'not care' for those that don't survive.
:?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Paul of Tarsus
Banned
Banned
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:42 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 150 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #34

Post by Paul of Tarsus »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 12:00 am
Paul of Tarsus wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 6:16 pm
None of us really know if you're a Jehovah's Witness

.... I used to be a Roman Catholic {snip}
Unproven claim. None of us really know if you use to be a Catholic or not.
Very good--that's exactly right. You generally have no way of knowing if the unverified claims of an anonymous internet poster, myself included, are true. All you know is that I've posted some claims.
Paul of Tarsus wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 6:16 pm
Can you back up the claim that a snake talked?
Evasion: nobody in this thread to my knowledge has mentioned a snake talking. I certainly made no such claim. Your not so subtle attempt to switch and bait does not detract from the baselessness of your own statement.
Jehovah's Witnesses believe the snake portrayed in Genesis 3 spoke to Eve (see the proof you deny at the bottom of this post). If you are familiar with Jehovah's Witnesses, then you know that they believe in that talking snake. Nobody, including yourself, is able to demonstrate such an outlandish claim to be true, of course.
Paul of Tarsus wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 6:16 pm
So just like I said, Jehovah's Witnesses think {snip : unproven claim }
Unless you are employing mind-reading capacities you cannot know what "Jehovah's Witnesses think" only what they have said. Our official Website contains the body of Jehovah's Witnesses official beliefs. I will ignore your implied supernatural ability to read minds for lack of verifiable proof, and repeat the request that you prove the initial claim you are obviously trying to shift attention away from.
Yes, it's true that I may not know exactly what all Jehovah's Witnesses are thinking. However, I can know what they are supposed to think by reading their literature. That's what I meant when I posted earlier, "...Jehovah's Witnesses think God has engineered cells and designed them to do what they do." I assumed that my readers are intelligent enough to understand that subtle distinction.
You made a claim of Jehovahs Witness theology, I responded with a simple enough request for proof of your claim. You respond by babbling on about talking snakes, DNA and your own opinion about genesis (which I don't recall asking you about).
I see that you are ignoring the evidence I posted from the JW.org website that demonstrates that, just like I said, Jehovah's Witnesses believe in and glorify a God they believe created cancer cells.
So here is my challenge again so everyone can note your next attempt to evade the request should you once more try to do so...
I see that you're pandering to "everyone." In that case let's let "everyone" decide what Jehovah's Witnesses believe about talking snakes and Jehovah creating cancer cells. I don't think your chances are very good at winning that election because most people need not agree with the Watchtower.

But just in case I'm wrong about everyone here seeing that I'm right, here's yet more proof.

BIBLE QUESTIONS ANSWERED
Where did the Devil come from?


Image

Your Cells—Living Libraries!

Image

2ndpillar2
Sage
Posts: 842
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 4:47 am
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #35

Post by 2ndpillar2 »

Paul of Tarsus wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 7:45 pm The philosopher Gottfried Leibniz argued that this is "the best of all possible worlds" to free God from blame for the world's troubles. In other words, this world, warts and all, is the best God could have done. I'm left wondering, though, why this world is the best possible. It seems likely to me that the world would be better off without cancer, for example, and therefore it's really not the best possible world. Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do? If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?
The law this world was built on was the law of equal and opposite forces (Newton's law). To have light, you first must have darkness. How can you judge good from evil, if you do not have evil. People have the free will to choose good (law) or evil (lawlessness). If one follows the light, they enter into life, if they follow darkness, they follow the path to death and destruction, such as cancer.
The laws of the new heaven and earth are different. For the millennium, you will not have the darkness stemming from the darkness/devil, for he will be bound in the abyss. Many people will not make into the millennium, for they have chosen lawlessness/wickedness. (Rev 8 & 9:18). The world started as a paradise, without lawlessness, until Adam and Eve chose lawlessness, which led to death/cancer.

User avatar
Paul of Tarsus
Banned
Banned
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:42 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 150 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #36

Post by Paul of Tarsus »

nobspeople wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 12:26 pmHaving survived pancreatic cancer, yes, I can say my world would be better without it.
First, thank you for answering my question(s). Civil and constructive debate is only possible when we fully, honestly, and sensibly address the issues. I will show you the same courtesy by answering your questions.

Anyway, I'm glad you survived cancer and realize that the world would obviously be a better place without it. If God exists, then he could have at least conceivably done better which is a big problem for anybody who believes in a perfect God.
But who's saying the world is the best possible world?
No on that I've seen. :shock:
I documented in the OP that the philosopher Gottfried Leibniz argued that this is "the best of all possible worlds" to free God from blame for the world's troubles. Voltaire ridiculed Leibniz and this philosophy in his famous spoof, Candide.
I've always thought it funny when someone survives cancer. Or a horrible accident. And people say 'God took care of them!'
Which is a slap in the face of all the hard-working medical professionals who actually helped save the sick/injured person and who deserve credit for doing so.
Yet other people are dying of cancer, or accidents all the time.
Using that logic, if God 'cares' for someone that survives, he must 'not care' for those that don't survive.
Either God doesn't care, or he took them to heaven. A third possibility that Christians often fail to entertain is that the person who dies was sent to hell. Maybe they don't want to think about that.

User avatar
Paul of Tarsus
Banned
Banned
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:42 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 150 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #37

Post by Paul of Tarsus »

2ndpillar2 wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 7:17 pmThe law this world was built on was the law of equal and opposite forces (Newton's law). To have light, you first must have darkness. How can you judge good from evil, if you do not have evil. People have the free will to choose good (law) or evil (lawlessness). If one follows the light, they enter into life, if they follow darkness, they follow the path to death and destruction, such as cancer.
The laws of the new heaven and earth are different. For the millennium, you will not have the darkness stemming from the darkness/devil, for he will be bound in the abyss. Many people will not make into the millennium, for they have chosen lawlessness/wickedness. (Rev 8 & 9:18). The world started as a paradise, without lawlessness, until Adam and Eve chose lawlessness, which led to death/cancer.
Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do? If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8488
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #38

Post by Tcg »

Paul of Tarsus wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 7:51 pm
Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do?
A God would need to exist in order to "do the best he presumably could do." As it stands, there is no reason to assume God, like all gods, exists anywhere other than in the imaginations of those who imagine his existence.

If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?
It doesn't. If there were a God to do something about it, cancer wouldn't exist. Of course if you are suggesting a God who has no power to do anything good, one would have to wonder why this thing that is known only to exist in the imaginations of it's followers deserves the title God.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8488
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Could God do better?

Post #39

Post by Tcg »

Paul of Tarsus wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 7:49 pm Either God doesn't care, or he took them to heaven. A third possibility that Christians often fail to entertain is that the person who dies was sent to hell. Maybe they don't want to think about that.
A fourth possibility is that God doesn't exist. Maybe they aren't alone in not wanting want to think about that.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Could God do better?

Post #40

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Paul of Tarsus wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 6:18 pm


I see that you are ignoring the evidence I posted from the JW.org website that demonstrates that, just like I said, Jehovah's Witnesses believe in and glorify a God they believe created cancer cells.
The original claim (below) and the claim (above) are inaccurate.
Do JWs believe God created CANCER cells ?
viewtopic.php?p=1039786#p1039786
It is UNTRUE that you have posted evidence from the official Jehovah's Witnesses website (www.jw.org) supporting the theology stated. You quote the bible from out Website but you did NOT quote the JWs theology based in that quotations.

Please note the following ....

Image


I am happy to educate you as to Jehovah's Witness theology ( teachings/interpretation) if you so desire, and address your new inaccuracies, but I am still wanting for you to support your original claim.


Here is the claim in question.

Paul of Tarsus wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 1:29 pm [Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #13]

Here's a partial outline of basic Christian/Jehovah's Witness theology:

The perfect goodness of God's creation includes cancer. ...we must accept cancer as a good thing ...

Here is my original challenge:
JehovahsWitness wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 3:42 pm... I hereby challenge you to find anything in [the Jehovah's Witness] literature or on our official Website (which outlines our official beliefs) to prove your post above true .
Thanking you in advance,


JW
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Tue May 18, 2021 2:39 pm, edited 4 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Post Reply